previous post next post  

The First Milblogging Conference.

By The Armorer on April 24, 2006 | | Comments (17) | TrackBacks (5)

I was gonna do a funny post on it, but, well, helk, I can't top SGT Hook's, so I won't try.

Simply put - this was a well-done event. For an event pulled together by a first timer, Andi of Andi's World, it was stunning in how well things went. Andi had lots of volunteer help - but let's be honest - this happened because *she* wanted it to.

The Greyhawks co-hosted the online forum. There was much fun in the chat room, even if it got rather distracting for Greyhawk when he was trying to harvest questions from the crowd.

The interaction between the people at the conference, and the online vultures watching on the livefeed was hilarious. A very visible result of that is CJ's bald spot on my Liveblogging post...

Big shout out to Military.com for their sponsorship and the excellent lunch. I gotta say, however, Navy types, even retired ones working for Military.com, still suck at PowerPoint and briefing... 8^) Sorry, couldn't resist! It was an excellent lunch, and I'll be happy to coach you for next year.

Austin Bay as the keynote speaker and closer was his usual succinct self.

The first panel, Milblogging Past, Present, and Future was hosted by Buzz Patterson consisted of hoary old Titans Matt of Blackfive and Citzen/LtCDR Smash, serving milbloggers CJ of A Soldier's Perspective and John from Op-For, rounded out by Marine veteran Steve of ThreatsWatch. This panel was a good retrospective on the who, how, and why of the Origins of Milblogging, as well as some of the rocks and shoals of same, revolving mostly around the minefield of OPSEC (hmmm, how many metaphors did I mix there...). Everybody agreed on the importance of OPSEC, but, just like the Services, not everybody agreed on what it is. As Matt noted, "OPSEC is like pornography - I can't define it, but I know it when I see it." Potter Stewart probably spun in his grave. Many of us obviously prefer the hands-off watchfulness of the Marine Corps approach to the mixed signals and hov'ring, sometimes baleful glare of Army scrutiny. Time will tell, and undoubtedly, some active-duty bloggers will get pinched in the gears of doctrine and policy development and implementation.

Did I say "doctrine"? Indeed, I did. CENTCOM sent several PAO reps who discussed that either CENTCOM is developing doctrinal proposals, or they are working with Big Army to develop same. I was late to that little cluster-chat out in the foyer and therefore might have who's doing what mixed up. The fact that they were at the conference is a positive development - because aside from the OPSEC issues, the other issue was... well, wait - that really surfaced hard in the last panel, Active Duty Milbloggers. 1st IO wasn't there officially, one hopes they at least watched the livefeed.

I have to admit I missed most of the second panel, as I was taking great risks with my personal OPSEC by talking to a couple of the journalists who were present, such as Mr. Glover of National Journal, so rather than cover what was said since I missed so much of it - I'll just tell you who was there and you can check the other AARs (which are linked to my Live Blogging the Conference post).

Andi of Andi's World hosted the panel, which was comprised of Carla of Some Soldier's Mom, Carren and Chuck Zigenfuss of From My Position, and Deb, from Marine Corps Moms. One thing I did take away from the panel was the distaff side is *still* not happy about how the services interact with the families - and that they are *very* appreciative of all the grass roots efforts that originated in the blogosphere. As a member of the distaff side during the Vietnam War, I can tell you however much it seems to suck now - it's light years better than it was then. There is obviously room for improvement. The next issue I caught was Chuck, a recently wounded-still-recovering soldier making a big point of the importance (and success) of Project Valour-IT, the laptops with voice recognition software for severely wounded warriors. Singled out for praise was our very own Denizenne (see how you spell that, wrench-monkey?) Fuzzybear Lioness of Fuzzilicious Thinking - who, despite her embarrassed protestations, is the real heart and soul of Project Valour-IT. Good job, Fuzzy!

The last panel, hosted by retired Colonel Dave Hunt of Fox News was titled Blogging From Theater, and consisted of Bill Roggio, a Marine vet and journalist who blogs at The Fourth Rail, Captain B of One Marine's View, Jeff from Dadmanly, Fred from In Iraq for 365, rounding out the panel was Michael from Fire and Ice.

Gotta admit here - Dave Hunt was very funny at first - but as it went on, well, at times, until later in the session, when he just let the guys talk, too often Hunt interposed himself into the conversation, cutting off comments and derailing thoughts. What works (which is arguable, since I won't watch 'em because of it, but they stay on) for the smash-and-gab of network talk shows was inapt and got to be annoying. But, as I said, it all settled out and the bloggers started getting to the guts of the matter - which is how to tell the story from in-theater, without revealing targeting and Battle Damage Assessment (BDA) data useful to the enemy, as well as letting out casualty data before the notification teams can get their jobs done.

The difficulties of telling the good and the bad, without the bad being a morale-killer. What was left unexplored was a discussion of talking about blithering idiot leadership or leadership decisions. All the guys on stage were about telling the stories of the soldiers - though there was some disagreement about just how to tell the tales. And all were adamant about the importance of self-regulation in terms of OPSEC - and of how important it was for the services to understand what the blogs are, how they work, and how to work with them. Much pessimism that the services will default to "shut 'em down" because that's the simplest approach.

I would note that the National Archives has a project to capture the milbloggers (the serving troops, not posers like me) stories - because they are the soldier diaries of this war, every bit the treasures and measures of insight into the warfighter as the dusty journals from the Civil War discovered in county historical society archives or barns in Belgium. Congrats to the VFW for their assist in this matter, *and* their assistance with putting on the Conference.

Of course, if they do that, unless they shut down email, blogging will go underground, and the Blackfives, Smash's, ThreatsWatch's, Fourth Rails, and yes, Castle Argghhh!s of the milblogging world will simply post the stories received via other means.

Better to embrace it and understand it than to try to be General Canute, standing at the water's edge, commanding the blogtide to stop. That image was used by one of the on-stage bloggers (I'm thinking Capt B or Mike Fay) as a description of the hubris and futility of such an effort. Of course, Canute was making a point about the limits of power... hopefully one the Generals will heed.


So - what's the take-away?

1. Milblogs started because we milbloggers didn't see the good news we knew was there being reported - so, we started reporting it.

2. They grew, because there were others out there who knew there had to be another view, but they couldn't find it from the MSM.

3. The services do a crappy job of sharing info with the public. Milbloggers fill this niche.

4. Milbloggers also nip at the heels of power - which isn't going to stop, so the Generals ought to learn to live with it - because it's the most powerful mostly-friendly voice on the Internet.

5. OPSEC. No one questions the importance of same. We'd all like a better working definition of same. And - we know the services have people who are reading the blogs watching for it - most of us will entertain polite, reasonable requests to withdraw data. You just have to be able to explain it --- and ask. But the services, especially for the active duty milbloggers, need to develop doctrine and guidance.

6. A warning for the Generals. Shut 'em all down, and what will be left? The malcontents will blog - anonymously - with no countervailing voice which currently overwhelms the discontented. Which is an expression of the fact that most of the troops are generally satisfied in the big sense with how things are going (we *always* bitch about the details) and the positive voices drown out the unhappy voices. Bring down the Crushing Boot of Doom... and only the malcontents will be left. Think about it, Powers-That-Be. Listen to your PAOs, and not as much to your lawyers and weak commanders who don't like any critical voice, however much else positive comes from those voices. But mostly, listen to your warriors. They have all our best interests at heart.

7. Next time:

a. We need two chat rooms. One for all the hilarious commentary, and one for the questions from those not able to be present. Greyhawk was losing hair trying to maintain control *and* squash the occasional troll who showed up.

b. Someone needs to step-up to the plate and take on the job of Party Planner. Andi can't do it all. No, I'm not volunteering. Every party I've hosted as an adult has been an abomination. Heck, when SWWBO and I got married, all of 6 people showed up for our in-home reception, so we aren't good choices. Unless we have the next conference in Kansas City (hey, it's Central) we could have a Castle Tour...

Wherever the next one is - if duty doesn't conspire to keep me away, I'll be there. Meeting all you guys was a hoot and an honor. We are the Davids.

Of course, I'm sitting in my room, listening the local ABC affiliate doing a story on Fran O'Briens, which will be shutting down. David doesn't always win. But Mr. Kelleher, of the Capital Hilton, certainly knows who we are...

Another thing I learned - it's tough to pull together a mini-Castle Blogmeet at something like this. We're obviously going to have to fix up the Castle and host a meet. Sigh. Making the Castle presentable will eat up a buncha spare time.

Wait! I know - we'll issue tools and make it a Castle-Raising! Yeah! That's the ticket!

Shout out to the Denizen/nes who came to the Conference - SWWBO, 1SG Keith, Sergeant B, Fuzzybear Lioness, AFSis, and Princess Crabby.

And there is a STORY. One I can't tell. I've been informed that "What happens in DC, stays in DC." Let's just say there was a Full Moon somewhere in District, despite the clouds and rain.

That is all.

Share This Article:

Share |

Categories:

5 Trackbacks

TrackBack this entry at http://www.thedonovan.com/cgi-bin/mt41/mt-tb.fcgi/5539

Milblog Conference from MY Vast Right Wing Conspiracy on April 24, 2006 6:36 AM

I’m bummed. I didn’t get to go to the Milblog Conference. Maybe next year. So anyway, if you want to know what happened, see Castle Argghhh!, Andi’s World (she has more stuff too, since she organized it!), Gunn Nutt (several posts ... Read More

The Milblog Conference from BLACKFIVE on April 24, 2006 10:06 AM

Okay, I've got a lot say about the MilBlog conference this weekend. It's going to take a bit to get something put together - however, I'll say that I was extremely impressed by all of the bloggers in attendence. A Read More

The Milblog Conference from BLACKFIVE on April 24, 2006 12:10 PM

Okay, I've got a lot say about the MilBlog conference this weekend. It's going to take a bit to get something put together - however, I'll say that I was extremely impressed by all of the bloggers in attendence. A Read More

The Milblog Conference from BLACKFIVE on April 24, 2006 1:28 PM

Okay, I've got a lot say about the MilBlog conference this weekend. It's going to take a bit to get something put together - however, I'll say that I was extremely impressed by all of the bloggers in attendence. A Read More

Live-Blogging the MilBlog Conference from La Shawn Barber's Corner on April 25, 2006 6:03 AM

Tuesday, April 25: Gunn Nutt has posted lots of photos. Captain Argghh! has a wrap-up. ———————————————————————&... Read More

17 Comments

By kat-missouri on April 24, 2006 6:06 AM
that was funny and very informative. 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.
 
By AFSister on April 24, 2006 8:35 AM
*gaaah-rinnnnn* "there's a bad moon on the rise"
 
By Jon The Mechanic on April 24, 2006 9:21 AM
I will verify that the Devine Miss "M" made an appearance. (I say MISS because I heard about the moon and I know the identity of the woman in the moon.) I will NOT be devulging the name of the woman in the moon because I found the story amusing, and I was sworn to secrecy on the matter.
 
By 1sg keith on April 24, 2006 10:24 AM
It shouldn't be a surprise, jon. It was a very PC thing to do...... hehe...
 
By cw4(ret)billt on April 24, 2006 12:03 PM
Geez, guys, talk about blatant OPSEC violations--*including* that mythological reference...
 
By Jon The Mechanic on April 24, 2006 12:24 PM
Bill, as long as the name of the guilty is not released, it is always deniable. And shouldn't you be digging a ditch or laying sod or something?
 
By Huntress on April 24, 2006 12:28 PM
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 know 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". :>)
 
By MissBirdlegs in AL on April 24, 2006 12:30 PM
John, I agree with you re Col. Hunt. I really got irritated with his interruptions. I like him okay on FNC, when it's just him, but always turn off the talking on top of talking stuff. Thoroughly enjoyed the a/v of the conference!
 
By Redhead Infidel on April 24, 2006 4:59 PM
John, what a great commentary on the panel discussion! You're several steps ahead of me, and if I end up getting real lazy, I'll just link over to you and not even bother with a recap! :) I just wanted to pop in and say it was great to meet you and Beth. I wish I'd gotten to talk with you more, and I didn't get to spend time with nearly as many people as I wanted to! All in all, it was a fantastic weekend, though! Huge kudos to Andi!
 
By Andi on April 24, 2006 5:59 PM
Hi John. I wanted to say what a pleasure it was to meet you and Beth this weekend. I'm sorry we didn't have more time to chat, maybe next year. I'm thrilled that you enjoyed the conference and thank you for your analysis and photos.
 
By Maggie on April 24, 2006 7:07 PM
Here's how rumors start! It wasn't a "moon". It was black lace panties pressed against a plate glass window. I was only following orders. Certain people were not keeping up with the "crawl" (certain people never even showed up, but I digress) and an order was given to "get the attenion of those inside Finn McCool's". HF6 went up to the window and swished her jean clad backside across the glass. I told her that was not how it was done. I have previously explained in this forum that flashing is an excellent means of communication. *bottom* line.........it was a *flash* not a *moon*. Of course Jon the Mechanic, and John of Argghhh would not know because they were not there! I am happy to report a marked increase in membership in my fan club.
 
By John of Argghhh! on April 24, 2006 7:55 PM
You got your story, I got mine. I like mine better, but, hey, so what? I was keeping someone's name outta the papers. Guess I don't hafta anymore!
 
By MaryAnn on April 24, 2006 8:58 PM
So *that's* what you guys did after you left Finn McCool's! Loved meeting all you guys and great wrap up, John.
 
By GunnNutt on April 24, 2006 11:39 PM
You were pointed out to me, but I didn't get to say "Hi". Belatedly, "Hi!". Great wrap-up!!!
 
By kat-missouri on April 25, 2006 2:08 AM
Huntress, I have a very long document that I am preparing on this very subject th may answer your points more completely. Before I begin, I want to acknowledge that you and I are on the same side. We want to win the war against Islamists. We want Iraq and Afghanistan to be successful, peaceful, non-proliferating, non-terrorist harboring nations. We want the military to be prepared ideologically and strategically to face the next battle in the war. With all due respect, I think that maintaining the position that the military has done all it can do and can do no more, while insisting that the media is to blame, is setting us up for failure in this very important, strategic battlefield. In light of this, I hope you will take these following points very seriously, but without offense: 1) Every blog I read, all the military and support people, all the political blogs, all the time are singing the same song: media bad, media bias, media the enemy (that is on the right and on the left). 2) I have my own opinions about the media, but my main objective was not to sing with the chorus; rather to "think outside the box" as it were and our box is a very narrow, partisan, love the military without reservation box which can affect good decision making in a bad way. 3)I think that it is appropriate and even important to critically review important strategic operations that, by the enemy's own words equals "half the battle is in the media", particularly when, whoever and and why ever, it is a failing or mediocre operation. It is too important to simply sit down and carp about the media without looking at every aspect that can be changed including what the military can do. Believe me, it is not perfect and to imagine that it should not be changed or that it should wait on some modified behavior from the media before taking some action is like sitting in a fox hole with a big red flag sticking out so the enemy knows exactly where to site in and mortar you. 4) The media is not some megalithic monolithic goliath that has a single commander that controls and orders all parts. It is multi-national, multi-functional, multi-factional, multi-cultural (I mean that as in many cultures, not the "I hate liberals" version) that includes, print, internet, satelite, cable, local networks, mom-and pop organizations, etc, etc, etc. Please forgive me if I believe that there is no one way to identify these organizations, not one giant descriptor, thus there is no "magic bullet" that will be shot out in the dark and cure them all. So, I prefer not to talk about "media bias" as if it was one giant entity with a bunch of zombies working for it, even if it makes some of us feel better. It will not solve the problem. It requires a lot more thinking, many types of solutions and a lot less finger pointing. In business, when planning or strategy meetings for fixing a problem degenerate into finger pointing, nothing gets fixed, everyone goes away angry and you usually keep giving the same bad service and/or product to the customer. 5) This is a military blog. I know that a lot of interesting military people read here. I am fairly certain that many less (possibly nil) journalists read this blog. The people I can possibly reach and start the "change strategy" with are the military, thus, instead of re-enforcing their belief in a perfect existing strategy, I want to address THEIR problems. They do exist. They read here. Frankly, it would be very interesting to get a schematic of how information is developed processed and distributed through the military and how the media accesses it. I have some idea and what I've seen so far does not impress me. It is overloaded with duplication and bureaucracy, it is inflexible and not user friendly, the distribution system is slow compared to the enemy, the info does not reach the correct distribution points and does not supply the type of "quality product" that "sells" in the individual markets (we're not just talking the American media; there is a lot more going on here than our media, though one can assume by the efforts here that it is equally disasterous in outside markets). It's basic business sense. And that is what we are talking about. If we refuse to identify the problems in the military system and the most we can do to the media is carp on individual stories where corrections are days in coming and somewhere off in la la land then it does no good. We have to get inside the enemy's information warfare cycle and disrupt it. Islamists, not the media, are the enemy. We can get inside their decision cycle on the physical battlefield, we need to do that in the virtual world as well. We have not yet accomplished that. We need to recognize and utilize the "media information cycles" as well; I will repeat my early comment - the media is not the enemy, they are the customer and even a strategic business partner. We need to start thinking like that, even bloggers. Businesses provide quality service and product. Partners help each other serve a wider customer base. If we do not start thinking like that, we will never make appropriate use of the very valuable distribution tool the worldwide media provides and manages. In short, the military to media endeavor needs to become Steve Austin: stronger, faster, better than it ever was before. Or, to put it in other military parlance, we need to "dominate the air" waves. One of the ways we can do that is to identify our customer base, identify their requirements, get feedback on our service and product and work to improve both. Because the media is not monolithic, we must look at each paper, network, magazine, etc as a different customer. When you do that and then realize that you have hundreds of customers that routinely do not use the product properly, break it, then asks for a refund, it is time to realize that your service, customer education and/or product has a problem that needs to be fixed. No business can stay "profitable" long if they didn't do that. This IS the business of war and losing this business can be very catastrophic. If we lose the media battle , we lose the war. Its that simple. The question for you and others who may not like what I am going to say on the subject is, are you comfortable to sit back, allowing your feelings about the media and military to interfere in good strategy planning and decision making, while griping about all the things you cannot change instead of looking for and changing those things that you can? while we get massacred on this particular battlefield? Please understand that this is not meant as a flame or to be offensive. I simply believe that it is too important to give it away that easy.
 
By kat-missouri on April 25, 2006 2:40 AM
PS..in a short version of the customer construct: If you go to restaraunt A and the waiter is rude, he doesn't tell you the specials, the food is cold, it takes a long time to get there, the dishes are dirty, the waiter never comes back to refill your drinks, never asks if you want more or would like desert, slaps the bill on the table and reminds you that the tip is not included; then you ask for the manager, who shows up thirty minutes later, spits tobacco on the floor near your feet, shrugs his shoulders at your complaints, points to the one bite you took out of the chicken and tells you that you ate it, you must buy it, then you notice some guy picking his nose in the kitchen and another scratching his butt, You go to restaraunt B. The waitress is very friendly. She points out the specials. Tells you what is good and what is "so, so". Lets you know that if you order this combo dinner you get twice as much food for less price. She fills your drinks immediately and comes back often to refil. The food comes out piping hot and fresh. The waitress comes back and offers you coffee and desert, brings boxes for left overs, reminds you that Tuesdays are "all you can eat", descretely puts the bill upside down on the table near the corner with her name and "thank you" on the back, smiles and wishes you a nice night, never mentioning the tip. Then you call the manager over who arrives within 2minutes, you compliment him on his restaraunt and staff, he comps you desert and hands you coupons for "buy one get one free", writes his name on the back and tells you to let him know if he can help you with anything else. When the door swings open to the kitchen, the staff look neat, their uniforms are pristine white and they all look industrious and proficient with sparkling equipment and utensils. Which restaraunt are you more likely to eat at again? Which one are you likely to recommend to your family and friends. Which one are you likely to call the INS and health inspector on? the media is the customer, not the military. The media may be PITA customer, but they are not the enemy.
 
By Murdoc on April 25, 2006 12:41 PM
Castleers: Good to finally meet you guys! Didn't get to talk to you as much as I wanted, but that seems to have been par for the course.