previous post next post  

Continuing the Discussion started at the Milblogger Conference.

By The Armorer on April 25, 2006 | | Comments (9)

It's clear the story out of the conference that has legs is that of... communication. How DoD communicates. How the blogs communicate. The responsibilities. There's a discussion going on in the comments that I think ought to come up into the air, between Denizenne Kat and The Huntress.

For some background on the subject check out Melinda's post at Most Certainly Not, and Grims post on the discussion with the CENTCOM PAO at Grim's Hall (Grim is reporting on the conversation I only caught part of). For a more mainstream report on the Conference and the issues therein - check out Daniel Glover's piece in National Journal.

Remember - these were in comments, not polished posts, so no snarking on Emglish or such.

Kat started it:

I started to write a message, but realized that I have about three or four posts worth of things I want to say. So, here I am, early morning, writing something, probably too extensive, but feeling very necessary to say about current information war efforts.

Since my old boss told me that, if you cannot summarize it in five bullet points or less, it will be tossed without reviewing the details, I will bullet point the situation as I see it. The conference was very helpful in formulating this concept.

Caveat:

Let me state clearly that, because I am largely focusing on the military’s efforts, the document puts a huge emphasis on the word “military” throughout each section. This document continues to reference the military because I believe that the military must change the most. However, whenever the word “military” appears here, I mean it to include the Department of Defense, the NSA, the CIA, congress and any administration leaders, including the president, who has a responsibility in this effort. I do not want officers, NCOs and enlisted men and women in the field to believe that I lay the blame solely at their feet or do not recognize that culture and regulations affect their ability to function and correct this problem. However, every person, from the top to the bottom, must be made aware of this problem so that all possible speed, resources and ideas may be brought to bare on this problem

1) Military Culture and Attitude Towards the Media is Bad.

2) The Military (and civilian administration) has failed to recognize the media is their customer, they are not the customer of the media.

3) This attitude, from top to bottom, is preventing the military from delivering the appropriate service to the customer/media.

4) The military has failed to recognize and maximize the media. It is the middleman. This middleman's distribution ability reaches the greater audience/customer base that it wishes to influence (I do not simply mean Americans, either). The Military on its own cannot hope to reach this audience, not even through maximizing its "niche market" of bloggers, military magazines and "friendly" media, though it is a place to start rebuilding.

5) The military needs to develop a business strategy that includes finding, developing, selling to and maximizing this customer base. It needs to include developing a customer service plan, identifying the customers' needs, appropriate distribution.

6) Passive distribution methods are ineffective. Military distribution of information acts as if it was a warehouse and the customer must come and pick up their own product or come to the office for service.

7) If the military does not provide the service to the media, it will get it from somewhere else. Quality may be poor, but quantity is never an issue. (list methods of identifying "customer" business and how to deliver services - most important is developing the personal touch)

8) The enemy has stated that half the battle is in the media. It is a major part of their strategy, not an after effect. The military has failed to elevate their information operations to the same status. It must become on par with Combat Operations and Civil Affairs.

9)The military has alternately treated the media with commraderie and contempt. Severe change in military attitude is directly related to Vietnam. All other actions and relations after only re-enforces this problem.

10) The military failed to understand the changing global information world during Vietnam and continues to fall behind in this category. The enemy then, as now, has not failed in this. (List specific lessons during this change).

Okay. It's 10 not 5, but lucky I didn't pontificate like I wanted.

One reason I thought about this is the PAO at the conference kept saying that he was putting this stuff out and the media was doing anything with it.

Huntress replied:

Kat:

Interesting but I disagree with much of where you lay the blame or much of what you wish would happen.

The military attitude towards the media isn't bad, in fact its quite the opposite. They want to work with the media...its the media that both hates, distrusts,and in effect refuses to work with the Military. It is the Medias attitude towards the 'evil military machine' that is at fault.

The only reason our enemies "use" the media effectively is because the media sees their message as the lessor of two evils, and in most cases sees our enemies as insurgents who have been victimized by American "Foriegn policy". America is to blame for Islamic hatred towards the West, and as such, our enemies are painted with a much more sympathetic brush.

To that effect, the MSM enjoys reporting bad, horrible, shitass news including what our enemies to do our troops, and framing all that our troops do in unfavorably light, all in the hope of accomplishing what the media coverage of Viet Nam accomplished - to sway public opinion AGAINST the war on terror, our mission in Iraq, our President, his administration, and to continue their negative assault on the 'evil military machine".

Fred, the PAO, you referred to, expressed his frustration at the mindset of some that blame military for "not getting the news out".

His point was that the military DOES get the news out through the PAO and remains frustrated at the media's attempts to distort, downplay and ignore the good news that the PAO delivers proactively and aggressively, to all Media outlets.

The media neither trusts nor cares to trust anything coming from the DOD, the PAO, and even milbloggers in the frontlines UNLESS it fits into their agenda. PERIOD.

Our enemies use our Media successfully to breakdown the will of Americans ONLY because our Media is a willing co-conspirator/partner.

For years after Nam, the Military was afraid to allow embeds, because they saw the effects of bringing the war LIVE into Americans livingroom.

That changed during the Gulf War and embeds are almost a fact of life, however the result remains the same. Embeds often do not provide a fair and balanced view of the war....and when they do...editors in the newsrooms make editorial decisions that lean towards their agenda.

I see no reason for the Military to engage in any further attempts to "make nice" to our media.
Nor do I see any reason to blame the military for the lack of fair and balanced reporting.

YOu might want to listen the Reuters panel discussion Media coverage of this war...you can access it on my blog. There were some excellent points made by Steve Boylan, Iraqi reporters, and Reuters Iraq Bureau chief. He mentioned that whenever Reuters reported on hospital openings, etc, our enemies would end up attacking these places, after hearing about them. Now Reuters is aware of how risky it is to mention hospital and school openings etc. Our Military is also aware of that danger...its not OPSEC in the true sense..but it raises serious concerns.

The collective MSM hates and distrusts the Military and any furthers attemts by the military to work closer with the Media will not be met favorably.

Instead, I want the Military to make much better use of milbloggers and independents like Roggio and Yon to get the message out. The multiplier affect these cyber outlets create guarantees the Military better coverage and a much larger reach, than anything they do now or try to do, with an unwilling MSM.

I've worked directly with the media on issues far less critical and seen the result first hand which amounts to the MSM telling me "I want the story to reflect our agenda...and so it shall".

One only needs to look at how other issues are framed: i.e. right to choose vs right to life, secularism vs religion, democrats vs republicans,
and you see the manipulative machinations that occur.

The Military is doing all they can when it comes to MSM who refuse to put aside their personal bias and agendas.....it's time for them to put more resources behind independents like Yon, Roggio, etc,(like providing them with body armour, etc, but NOT controlling what they write) and to work with milbloggers so that they can be free to deliver an honest message that doesn't interfere with OPSEC.

I enjoyed the entire event, participating virtually was great, and especially loved the last panel! Had an important family event not been happening on the same weekend, I would have been "getting into a lot of trouble in DC". :>)

Perhaps we can attract the Castle's occaisional professional journalist visitor to this discussion...

Share This Article:

Share |

Categories:

9 Comments

By AFSister on April 25, 2006 11:49 AM
I felt bad for Smink up there, taking heat for not getting the word out. The stories are being written- and are available for public use- but the distribution methods need to be improved somehow. That being said... you can lead a horse to water, but you can't make 'em drink. No matter how many stories are put out there by the PAO's, it's up to the media to pick it up and run with it. Unfortunately, all they want to run with are stories about our guys dying. That's were bloggers come in. It's up to bloggers to pick up the pieces and report stories than no one else hears since the media sure as hell won't do it. Milbloggers are not the enemy- in fact, they could be more beneficial to the armed forces than the DOD realizes. Instead they are focused on monitoring what is being released instead of promoting what is being released. In my perfect world, there would be a site made available to the general public that would post every (and I mean EVERY) story covered by military public affairs offices. A centralized, easy to access site full of the good, the bad, the beautiful and the ugly. ahh... what a wonderful world it would be.
 
By kat-missouri on April 25, 2006 1:07 PM
Look, bloggers are not going to over take the media on its distribution ability unless military bloggers and their friends become millions. We know that bloggers do have an audience, but an individual blog may only have a few dozen visitors, if that, per blog. Further, as an earlier discussion on polarized groups at this site indicated, people have a tendency to drift to their own kind of blogs. Thus, interested people are looking for military stuff and war related news go there, but those on the outside, who do not spend their time looking at blogs, who work all day, who may only surf the net long enough to see what Yahoo news and MSN news have up, go home and watch the six o'clock news or catch cable networks. Unfortunately, that latter half is exponentially higher than the blog audiences. So, no matter what, I believe that imagining blogs will have an impact on the war in the next three months, 12 months or even three years is wishful thinking, even if the blog world keeps growiing. A useful study I saw (wish I could find the link) indicated that 3/4 or more of the blogs are personal diaries about personal life, not dedicated to politics or military or the war. That is miniscule in comparison. Having said that, blogs and the internet have a very specific place in the information war. Actually, two places: 1) It's a niche market of interested people. By focusing on certain stories and passing information, those same people will do things like direct a few friends (skeptics for instance) to the websites, or forward in email, or even be able to bring up the info in casual conversations with people. That has a ripple effect. Or, if you prefer, with enough people able to obtain, evaluate and distribute info through word of mouth, eventually you can reach the tipping point. (Malcolm Gladwell's book; I highly suggest it for people who are trying to think how this all works). We also have the ability to counter the media information with expertise that individual media organizations simply do not have due to budget constraints or because they don't have time in their story cycle. We can do that, but we have to be much more organized and focused. We in the blog military world have got to be able to find and point to experts. We have some, but, from my point of view, Roggio, Yon, etc are just not enough or quoted enough or anything else to put them above or infront of already processed media stories. These stories have to be affected with the appropriate info and attitude the minute they are put out by the media. That can only come from a relationship with the military. If we want to push the blog experts to the fore front then we (we bloggers) would have to become a little more savvy on how the internet works, how google or other search engines work, etc. Which leads to my next point. 2) How we as bloggers can have a much bigger effect outside of our "niche" (though, that is an important aspect of blogging, I have another thing in mind). Search engines usually bring up a list of stories/websites that are in order of the most viewed. However, it has to hit on key search words entered by people looking for info. We can effect that. We can over run the enemy propaganda and we can actually over run media stories or even get focus on specific news stories by linking to them and getting them viewed. You ever look at the bottom of the yahoo news page after you've opened a story? It has additional related stories for the one that you are reading. They are broken into categories. One says "latest", but the one I thought was the most interesting and had value in our part of the information war was the one that said "most viewed". I know when I look at the stories, I am looking at the other related stories, too. It's like basic business. Like when you go to the restaraunt and the waitress asks you if you would like desert or interest you in a cup of coffee. Or the drive through window person asks after your order "would you like that super sized". It's the power of suggestion. They do it because marketing studies show that there is a significant possibility that you are going to say "yes", increasing their sales, revenue and profit. So, we can have an effect, but only if we are able to organize and put focus on certain stories. same thing with blog entries we would like to be the first to come up if someone types in, say the words, Abu Graihb. Blackfive had a post up with the "new pictures from Abu Graihb" in the title. He posted it right around the time that the media was talking about "new pictures from Abu Graihb". Blackfive's pictures were from the hospital and CAP showing our soldiers doing good work. Obviously, the media was not talking about that. However, that was very savvy on Blackfive's part. He took advantage of the key word search effect. The only problem is, for this to have been an effective counter for the media version, B5's post would have had to have been linked and viewed tens of thousands of times (if not millions). we need to understand this process as bloggers and figure out how to use it to our advantage to get the message out. Informal, civilian operated, non-government sponsored, information operations. It would be great if one of the techno geek bloggers who knew how this worked could do a post and help instruct the rest of us on how to take advantage of the system.
 
By AFSister on April 25, 2006 1:45 PM
I'm not disagreeing with you, Kat. That's why I said that the DOD should be working WITH bloggers to get the word out instead of trying to sensor them, and why I would love to see a centralized information source for stories. The stories *are* getting reported, but the reports aren't being picked up by MSM and made public enough. Blogger's can't do it all, I realize that, but we are the ones picking up the stories so why not figure out a way to exploit that?
 
By kat-missouri on April 26, 2006 1:03 AM
Oh, don't get me wrong. I think there is a place for the blogosphere as an add on enhancement to the entire project, but I think that the place with the big bang is in changing relationships with the media and military.
 
By kat-missouri on April 26, 2006 6:21 AM
Huntress, I am coming back to you with some comments, but I would say that I do not totally disagree with your comments. I have thought about some of these myself and that is why I have talked about the media as an international distributor of information and a conduit to these different areas, cultures and social constructs. In order to stay in business in these areas, the media must know what its audience wants and it gives it to them. I believe that, by using the same marketing tools that the media uses to identify its customers and determine the presentation, content and response to their stories, the military may be able to use that information to better use the massive distribution tool that is the media. I would like to stress that my fondness for the media is a fondness for their distribution capabilities, their millions (should I say "billions") of viewers/readers, their ability to disiminate messages almost instantaneously. My thoughts are that I would like the military or, more appropriately our "information operations" to be able to take full advantage of that tool. That includes identifying where the military, DoD, or any other participant in the information war can improve their operations to do so. Even if we do an end run on the media and try to determine the make up of the audience and how to present information, we still need the media to distribute so we still need to know how they work, how they determine what to cover, how they shape stories and how it makes it into their cycle so that we can better use that tool. With all due respect to bloggers, we do not match the distribution capabilities of the media. We can attempt to move them on certain stories one way or the other, correct misinformation or disinformation, but we do not have the current capacity to counter every story that is put out. In this, we would have to be selective. In any case, this concept of civilian information operations through the blog and other experts is not a replacement for the capabilities of the international media to distribute information but an enhancement to current operations. I believe that to ignore the media or discard any ideas of reshaping the military/media relationship is less than strategically sound. It would simply leave them in charge of distributing the story to millions of people that only get their information from the media without input or with limited input from the military. That seems catastrophic to me and in fact implies a garrison defense.
 
By Huntress on April 26, 2006 12:19 PM
Hey Kat... Let me be clear that at no point am I saying bloggers should replace entirely traditional media outlets of distribution...however...wishing and hoping that the media will let go of their anti military anti Bush, pro "insurgency" agenda is like asking me to walk on water. It won't happen! The PAO that is operating from the field provides hundreds of wonderful upbeat stories of the small but powerfully important changes, and positive impact our troops have daily on the Iraqi population, as well as stories of our successes in mitigating enemy attacks, capturing the enemy, etc. That the MSM chooses NOT to run those stories is NOT the fault of the PAO. Editors make those decisions and the choices they make more often than not reflect their agenda...be it a right wing or left wing agenda. Fox is no different...while claiming to be fair and balanced...they lean right far more than left...altho I do admit that they are MORE balanced than CNN and most other network outlets. I strong encourage, implore, beg, you all to listen to the entire REUTERS event on this veru subject that transpired a few weeks ago. The panelist are from Iraqi media, bloggers, Reuters, and the Steven Boylan, as well as other print media. Listen to the challenges the Military faced in getting out The Complete Picture..listen to the challenges Reuters faces in making decisions to embed reporters in dangerous areas, and to share the great news of hospital openings, only to have the "insurgency" attack that very hospital the next day. These issues are extremely important in understanding the daunting task of accessing and delivering the kind of information we all feel needs to be heard. I do believe that bloggers reach a much wider audience than you give them credit for. The multiplier affect alone speaks to that truth. Lets not forget...viewership and readership of MSM is rapidly and continuously declining....while bloggership increases. THe only challenge I have with milbloggers is that once they return back home...they stop blogging...so the connections we make with one articulate milblogger suddenly comes to an end...and we are left to find others to connect with. Longetivity is very important in establishing trust, and continous loyalty and readership. I wish Dan Bout would continue to blog..but now he is dealing with re integrating back into the life he left behind. I do agree that we can't simply cast aside the MSM..but we cannot expect the MSM to cast aside their agendas in order to deliver the complete picture. It is imperative that blogs become the driving force to help educate the masses, to help bring a more complete picture of our endeavors in Iraq and Afghanistan, and it is imperative that the Military include bloggers such as Blackfive, as well as those in the field, to deliver stories, podcasts, press releases, and to begin to include them in their relationship building efforts. Im not suggesting the end their relationship with the MSM...thats would be impossible and foolish. But I do believe the Military PAO needs to ensure that more of their PA guys in the sandbox create blogs, that bloggers link to yhem, and share these stories throughout the blogsphere. Blogs are fast becoming passe...now audio blogs and podcasts which can be downloadable to handheld devices are increasing in reach, popularity, and demand. Why not have the PAO use thier guys in the sandbox to create not only written blogs, but podcasts, and audio blogs! Chris Missick did that with much success. It was fun to hear the guys talk in the sandbox be interviewed, and chose thier favorite musical selections. If "Wired Magazine" can track down Dan Bout and others to feature them in a high profile article about milbloggers, then why isn't the PAO approaching these type of magazines and offering them access to interesting stories, interviews with milbloggers, etc. You also need to remember that those that choose to believe the the military is evil, the current administration is akin to Hitler, and more evil that Saddam or the Mullahs, will not be open to listening to " happy success stories"...because it doesnt fit in with their belief system however unfair or flawed that might be. Great example: if you read my latest blog entry I discuss five movies oon Iraq that my former associates in Hollywood are producing and releasing during this year ....all of them negative, dark, and deliberately meant to deliver their left wing negative filled message about Iraq, our soldiers, war, and the military and the Bush administration. To counter that kind of crap coming from Hollywood... bloggers need to insist that we simply won't spend money watching those films...and make sure we spread the word to everyone to boycott those films...but more importantly..the Military PAO needs to aggressively work with guys I write about, like Rich Paetz who spent a year in Iraq filming the wonderful humanitarian work his unit did with Iraqi kids. He could use some help in getting the documentary into the hands of distributers, getting it marketed, publicized, and maybe even receive funding for a "mini premiere". I write about those positive things...but how many even bother to pick up on it and spread the word....that story alone has been up on my blog for a month now. Blackfive should be talking about it, the Castle, Michelle Malkin, and many more bloggers and milbloggers alike should be sharing these kinds of stories, and making sure that these kind of important endeavors are being shared in the blogsphere. I was stunned that so few people at the Milblog convention did not know about The War Tapes! It's a creative example of reality documentary making that MUST be talked about. I've known about for two months now...and yet its never even been mentioned on high profile high traffic blogs and milblogs. And we wonder why we are losing the "shaping of the hearts and minds" battle against the MSM and the terrorists? These may sound like small insignificant things to be talking about...but collectively they add up..and damn it ...if we overlook the small things...then we do a big injustice to our troops, our goals, and in the end, we become no different that the very MSM we are all frustrated with. It is also imperative that the Military PAO begin to use these new technologies, this "New Media" in some of the ways I ve just mentioned. If you don't think the power of the blogsphere can usurp the Big Boys ( Big Media) then just ask any small indep band, not signed to any labal, just how much traffic, and exposure they get in the cyber world when they create websites to help promote their music! Many a new artist has been signed to major record deals as a result of their success in the blogsphere. In five to six years, MSM will no longer be the big Goliath they think they are now. Just like technology brought down the big goliaths in the music industry....and just like it will do to the film industry....it will also do to the MSM! Lets work NOW with this new media...and screw the MSM...they can get with OUR program..or they can die a slow painful death.
 
By 1SG Keith on April 26, 2006 1:05 PM
Okay. Now it's time for me to jump in and comment on a few of the comments. AFSis is right. From my experience in Bosnia in 2003 and Afghanistan in 2004/2005, I can tell you we produced a shitload of stories. In Bosnia, we produced an 8-page weekly magazine, The Talon. We got the finished product on Friday morning. My job was take the issue and go through and highlight which stories to send out as press releases to hometown newspapers. It was usually 12 to 15 per week. Since our task force consisted of Guard and Reserve troops from 22 different states, there were always stories to send home. Not counting the state Guard PAO's and Army Reserve magazine, I remember less than a dozen making it into hometown newspapers. 12-15 per week for six months, and a dozen get published. And we weren't targeting MSM outlets, just the hometown newspapers. The same thing occured in Afghanistan, although we got published in a lot of online foreign news websites. DOD Newslink, Defend America, ARNews published our stuff. I had several products on Indian and Pakistan news sites, but I don't think I ever had anything published anywhere in the US. If I did, I don't remember it. Smink talked about the DIVIDS system. DIVIDS was developed because some forward thinking PA person somewhere said, 'hey. If the civilian news guys can send their stuff by satellite, why can't we?' DoD news products were taking weeks to get back to news outlets, and no one prints old news. With DIVIDS, PAO folks are able to shoot B-roll, or photos and print products, walk over to DIVIDS and send it right NOW to the DIVIDS hub. Then news outlets can get the info for free for publication. Some local news stations will take the B-roll footage and have one of their reporters read the script, so it looks like their people did it. This is an accepted practice, usually with some type of attribution. But again, you can lead a horse to water, but you can't make them drink. The info is available faster, but if the MSM refuses to use it, there's not a lot you can do. The military IS looking at blogs now and not just with a suspicious eye. When the Army sends out it's 'Stand To' there is a section about what is being said on blogs. DoD is starting to come around and is realizing that we(MilBloggers) are a good way to get out accurate news about what's going on. Thinking that the relationship between the military and MSM will improve is like thinking Hillary and Newt will be exchanging wedding vows. It just ain't happening. Too many of the MSM want anything that makes this administration look bad, and aren't interested in the good stuff. That's why we haven't heard too much about Fran O'Brien's in anything but local news. That why when the presidential election in October 2004 was going on in Afghanistan, the good news items weren't getting out. You heard about the ink problems, and the unfounded fraud complaints. But you didn't hear about the women who thought they would be killed for voting, so they got dressed up so that they would be pretty when they died because they WERE going to vote. Or the old father who had his sons carry his bed to the polling place because he wanted to vote once before he died. You didn't hear about the Afghans who turned in Taliban who were planting IEDs to disrupt voting. Other than John reporting it here, you didn't hear about the poll workers who had to be rescued from the snow in the mountains because they refused to leave the ballot boxes. On and on and on... MSM will never print anything that shows the military or a republican administration in a good light. To think anything else would be a pipe dream. And THAT's why MilBlogger's need to keep putting the stories out there. Watch OPSEC, but tell as much as you can. People are reading. and the numbers of readers are growing because they see that they aren't getting everything from MSM. Damn, I think that's the longest comment I've ever left. Gotta go. The boss is actually expecting me to work....
 
By kat-missouri on April 26, 2006 4:09 PM
Okay, Let me agree on some points. There is a precedent in business for establishing direct relations from the "manufacturer" to the "end user". Typically, the manufacturer develops information on a new product and provide something like a website or an 800 number for potential customers to call if they are interested in a product. The manufacturer would have made strategic partnerships with specific distributors where that distributor foots some, or all of the advertisement bill, the manufacturer, knowing its product, creates the sales pitch, images and video (all billed to the strategic partners who accept it as part of their cost of doing business). Then, when a customer calls the 800 number the customer service people can answer questions, explain limitations of use or necessary processes to obtain the product and direct the customer/end user to a distributor. The phones are manned by people who have either worked for the manufacturer or are selected and trained by the manufacturer, who are familiar with the product, its capabilities, trouble shooting, etc but whose salaries are again paid for under the organization formed for strategic partnership, not current employees of the manufacturer. This happens quite a bit in home health care and is designed to develop interest in the product and a loyal customer base, which is the mainstay of any business. One time only customers are simply "gravy" as we used to say. Home health agencies and manufacturers of product are restricted by many laws governing "cold sales" to medicare beneficiaries in order to reduce non-essential use, over billing to Medicare and reduce conflict of interest by recommending a service that is rightfully prescribed by a physician. I think that this sort of organization could take place in the internet community with a strategic partnership to an organization, something like the milblog wire with additional partnerships with sponsors who buy ads and groups like the one that did the "war tapes" videos. something like Pajamas Media but specifically an aggregator of military/war related news. These groups can be formal organizations with informal associations. It can organize experts in military affairs, but they may have to be capable of almost instantaneous response to certain stories, like the willie pete story. Or, the organization can be formed on loose networks where the organization actively looks for already prepared works that coincide with the objective of countering or presenting specific information. It would also depend on receiving "completed works" such as that on the DIVIDs. I think it would be important that the military be ready and willing to receive feedback on what they are producing and what is of interest to these groups. In this case, because smith-mundt and various other acts that prohibit certain financial tractions in regards to releasing certain information used for "foreign target audiences" to the American public without a specific request for "review", the military could not pay directly for any operational costs of the organization. At most, it could buy advertisement with the organization to be placed on all manner of product like websites, t-shirts, pens, pencils, etc. This separation of finances would be very important for two reasons: first, to satisfy legal considerations; second, to insure that it is not seen as a direct propaganda effort by the military to the public which could erode public trust. Some overflow of this attitude will be expected anyway, but it is best to limit it as much as possible. And, you are right on one aspect, such an organization would have the reach in terms of "expert journalists in the field", unpaid people who write their stories because they want them heard. These could be military, civilian contractors, locals to the combat area (like ITM brothers, who are with PJ media but we could find others who are equally capable; I just saw Zeyad from the Messopotamian picked up in the WaPo, etc). Bring in the Yon's, Roggios, and guys like security watchtower or counterterrorism blog as "strategic partners" and you may have a product that the media cannot resist. Particularly if this organization does part of the media's job for it. That is in fact, what strategic partners often do and I believe that this organization, besides pushing the stories out to the "end user" without the middle man, can, as we have in many respects under informal processes, push stories to the media in a non passive manner which is, as I point out in my criticism of the military endeavor, one of the problems with the current system. It is certain that PAOs create and "put out" stories every day, but it is certainly a passive distribution which leaves the selection or non-selection of stories and content to the media. The other important factor, which you noted, is that the blog world has a lot of informal relations with people who know people and could help get things distributed or people interested in stories. Another great idea was definitely the ability for soldiers to do podcasts or provide pictures or video directly. this information organization would have to be willing to do some self policing and work with the military on opsec issues, but would probably be less restricted in what it could or would show. It would also need some people who would be willing to interact with commanders and such, going to bat for some milbloggers if that bloggers commander has not bought into the "insurgent information war" program. We would need some contacts high up to help if it became to difficult. Some gentlemen and ladies in uniform or DOD that we can sell on the importance. In fact, this reminds me of somethings I just read: What is the organization for guerrilla warfare? Though all guerrilla bands that spring from the masses of the people suffer from lack of organization at the time of their formation, they all have in common a basic quality that makes organization possibleAll guerrilla units must have political and military leadership. This is true regardless of the source or size of such units. Such units may originate locally, in the masses of the people; they may be formed from an admixture of regular troops with groups of the people, or they may consist of regular army units intact. And mere quantity does not affect this matter. Such units may consist of a squad of a few men, a battalion of several hundred men, or a regiment of several thousand men. All these must have leaders who are unyielding in their policies—resolute, loyal, sincere, and robust. These men must be well-educated in revolutionary technique, self confident, able to establish severe discipline, and able to cope with counter-propaganda. During the progress of hostilities, guerrillas gradually develop into orthodox forces that operate in conjunction with other units of the regular army. Thus the regularly organized troops, those guerrillas who have attained that status, and those who have not reached that level of development combine to form the military power of a national revolutionary war. There can be no doubt that the ultimate result of this will be victory. Unorganized guerrilla warfare cannot contribute to victory...Mao Tse Tung On Guerilla War. This is what we are suggesting. Guerilla Warfare against a large organized, standing army of "mainstream media". In order to replace them as arbiters of the "war" news, we have to become at least organized Guerillas. Right now, we are "bandits and anarchists". Then there is the subject of mibloggers in this "insurgent operation". This organization can become the conduit through which the milblogger becomes: 2. Combatant-Propagandist Guerrillas In order to obtain the maximum results from the psychological operations in guerrilla warfare, every combatant should be as highly motivated to carry out propaganda face to face as he is a combatant. - Tayac n Psychological Operations in Guerilla Warfare In other words, every milblogger is not just some guy or girl serving in their MOS and writing about it. Every soldier, from commander to lowest enlisted man becomes an information operations operative or, according to the last document, a combat propagandist guerilla. He's doing the hard work and spreading the message. Or, as David Kilcullen wrote in his 28 articles on company level counterinsurgency: Armed Civil Affairs. I still have thoughts on military to media relations that I am sorting out. I also believe that such an organization as we are speaking of would, in the end, either have to mirror the media with their distribution abilities to overtake them, or would have to swallow their angst and view the media as a "strategic partner" that they would work with once the organization has developed "end user" interest. Such partners wouldn't have to be CNN (though, if you could cultivate them, it would be a nice coup). They could be fox, or A&E, or the military channel, or the history channel, Ollie North's War Stories, Sgt Ermey's Mail call, etc, etc, etc. Independent Channels. There are plenty of ways to work it, but work it we would have to.