There was a brief mention of blogs in this piece, and I think that aspect of Information War and media relations deserves a little more attention. The reason why, is because the main stream media or MSM is quoting and linking to blogs and ezines all the time these days. So web publishers are having an impact on the national and international dialogue. And when politicians, CEO’s, celebrities and generals blog, or refer to certain blogs, then you start to get the idea that there might be something there. Even President Obama ‘vlogs’ or uses a video blog format on Youtube to get messages out.
This article also discussed the other reality of blogs and information war–the main stream media hates it. The MSM is a business that depends upon a viewership or readership. They also do not like competition for the facts or story, and when blogs from the troops or from security contractors are able to tell the same story as the MSM, who will the public listen too? Or better yet, when those same individuals have stories or insight that is not being talked about in the MSM, then now we are really a threat. You even see the MSM starting blogs, just to compete with the Joe the Plummer bloggers out there. But really, those MSM blogs are a joke, because they are still controlled by corporate and still have to abide by the agenda of that company. Guys like me, pay for my own hosting and do it all, and I do not answer to anyone. I still have to abide by some basic truths of publishing, like getting the facts straight and staying within the law as best I can. I also have non-disclosure agreements that I must hold to, or face legal action. But since I started Feral Jundi, I have yet to be contacted by any companies telling me to cease and desist all blogging activities. I am not bound by paying salaries, or finding good editors, or managing a office, or paying for lawyers and leases and insurance for all of my employees. Blogging is just a fun platform for me to use, to connect with an industry I care about and fill the information void about us.
But in terms of our place in media, we are like insurgents, because it is the little guy versus the big guy. And what do insurgents do? They attack larger forces where they are weakest. They are also able to connect with the local populations better than the larger force. And the population I am talking about, is the security contracting industry. The MSM is like the foreign army that keeps bombing villages in our world, and that is what makes guys like Eeben, or Jake, or Tim, or any of the other media insurgents out there stand out as leaders amongst the industry.
So what is the achilles heel of the MSM? That’s a good question, and like a true insurgent, I am always probing the defenses and trying to find those weaknesses. One area I see a weakness is speed. I can publish very quickly online, and continue to edit that story throughout the day. I also have readers that can help me edit, just by telling me that something is not right. My readers also come to know me and what I stand for, and I am more reachable than lets say Anderson Cooper or some media celebrity. So the interaction with my readership is more personable as well. Cost is another weakness. I can set up blog after blog, or just continue working on this one, for very cheap, and that is very powerful. With all the DIY stuff on how to build blogs on youtube and the net, I can also build stuff on my own for very cheap.
The other strength of blogs, is that I can connect with other like minded bloggers and ezines publishers, and we actively support one another’s stuff. Does CNN do that with Fox News? We as bloggers understand the strength in unity concept, and it helps with insurgencies, and it also helps with bloggers and getting readership. My networks become aware of other like minded networks. It really helps to connect with other bloggers that have credibility and know how to write, and it is a strategy that works. We correct each other, we give each other ideas, and the strength of that group only helps the strength of it’s members.
We are also an example of PMC 2.0 and how to do it yourself. Today’s DIY information war, is a radical concept and the military is catching on. From Trooptube to blogging, the military is using these tools and certainly not pleasing the main stream media. And like the article said, the media treatment of the Tet Offensive is like the Alamo in terms of information war–‘Remember Tet’. In essence, the military is filling the information void or telling the story first, before the media does, and the PMC/PSC industry needs to learn from this.
There is a flip side to this too. Not everyone can do this kind of thing. If that blogger is good, the readership will stick around and keep coming back for more. If they suck, or lose interest in the subject, then the blog will just wither away in obscurity. The interesting thing about bloggers is that we become more and more like journalists and reporters all the time, because if our stuff sucks and it is not truthful, or interesting, or read well, then you lose folks.
Either way, it is competition with the MSM, because they want readers going to their websites and papers, and reading their ads. More readers, equals higher value of ad space, which means they can sell ads for more money and pay for journalists and reporters and their facilities. It’s a business, and us small guys cut into that business. The best part of blogging is that when you actually do reach a level of high readership, then ad space on our site is worth a lot to those same companies that run to MSM. Or at the least, those ads pay for hosting of the site so that blogger can keep on keeping on. Not to shabby for an insurgent, huh? lol –Matt
——————————————————————-
They Still Don’t Like It
February 8, 2009:
Strategy Page
Three years ago, in the battle between the military and the media, the troops were losing. The reason was simple economics. Military defeats are, for the media, more profitable than military victories. Good news doesn’t sell. This causes problems when you are fighting a war.
Back in the 1980s, the U.S. Department of Defense came up with the concept of Information War. This new combat arena included both the traditional battle over communications networks (which were growing increasingly complex and important), information itself, and the impact of the mass media on military operations. This last aspect was a result of how the mass media turned on U.S. operations in Vietnam after 1968. This left a big impression on a generation of U.S. officers. Ironically, the trigger for that turnaround was the Tet Campaign. This desperate attempt by the communists to trigger a mass uprising in South Vietnam, was a major defeat for the communists, and destroyed the local guerilla movement, the Viet Cong. But the media spun it as an American defeat, and the Department of Defense was still trying to figure out, in the 1980s, how they could avoid repeats of the Tet experience.
But while the military was pondering solutions, the media news business went through a transformation that rendered the Tet experience largely irrelevant. In the last three decades, TV news has become less a public service, and more a profit center. Ratings, and the resulting advertising revenue, became paramount. Public service went out the window, and competition for viewer eyeballs became everything.
The best example of this change could be seen in the reporting of the 2003 invasion of Iraq. During the month of fighting that led to the fall of Baghdad, 51 percent of the U.S. network news stories were negative. By late 2003, nearly 80 percent were negative. During the 2004 Presidential elections, 89 percent were negative, and by 2006, over 90 percent were negative. This despite a long string of additional victories. The media became increasingly reluctant to interview the troops, because they told a story that was quite different from what the TV news media was spinning.
Then something else happened. In the mid 1990s, the World Wide Web came along, and now, over a billion people are connected to it. The majority of young people, and an increasing number of older ones, were now getting most of their news from the web. That’s where the troops, and other non-journalists who have been to Iraq, or are still there, could tell their story. Compared to the network news, it’s amateur night on the web. But the shift in where the eyeballs are looking is striking. The audience for the network news gets older, and smaller, every year. The younger generation of viewers are getting their news from the web. While much of that news is still created by the traditional mass media, a lot of it comes from blogs and independent news analysts. The traditional news outlets no longer matter as much as they used to, and matter less each passing day.
This provided the Department of Defense with new Information War opportunities. One of the new ideas was to pump out more raw material to the general public, and thus the independent, web based, news outlets. These new web based news outlets don’t have to invent bad news in order to survive. The web, in the end, solved the military’s problem of getting an accurate report of their operations to the public.
In the last five years, Department of Defense spending on Information War operations increased 63 percent, to nearly $5 billion a year. About a third of this is for recruiting, and this includes “America’s Army,” which was originally developed, before September 11, 2001, as a recruiting and public relations tool. This MMOG (massively multiplayer online game) cost over eight million dollars to create. By late 2002, it had 929,000 registered players, 563,000 of whom stayed around long enough to finish the basic training exercise. The game costs nearly $3 million a year to maintain. So far, nearly ten million people have downloaded the front end (player) software. At peak times, over 5,000 players are online with the game simultaneously. The users have completed nearly 400 million missions, from basic training to War on Terrorism. Recruiters are satisfied with the number of prospects coming in because of the game. But an unexpected bonus has been the number of other uses the game has been put to. A modified version is employed for actually training troops and, from an Information War point of view, showing a lot of Americans exactly what the army does and how it is done.
The troops themselves quickly invented one of the most powerful tools; videos posted on YouTube and other online venues. Military personnel in the combat zone had small vidcams, and they often let them run during combat. They then posted the vids online, and now the military has its own official site for such material, and distributes many to the mainstream media.
Nearly half a billion dollars a year is spent on Information War operations in foreign countries. This attempts to deal with a reflexively anti-American media in many countries (hatred always sells best). These media outlets are often corrupt as well, and for sale. The Pentagon does not join in the ongoing bribeathon, but there are other ways to throw money around.
The traditional media is not happy with all these Information War victories by the military, and has accused the military of engaging in propaganda, or worse. This is nothing new, such accusations go back to the earliest days of the mass media, during the American Civil War (1861-5). The military has tried to work things out during all that time, with mixed success. After World War I, the army put one of its brightest and articulate officers, Douglas MacArthur, in charge of “media relations.” MacArthur was so good at promoting the army, and himself (especially during his successful World War II career), that he earned the eternal enmity of the media. Mac played the media so well, that the backlash trashed his reputation to the extent that historians are reluctant to correct the many media inventions.
Now, a new generation of MacArthurs are pounding the media into the ground, and they still don’t like it. But unlike MacArthur, the media is no longer controlled by a few large news organizations that can effectively go after too-clever exploiters of media foibles. One can only imagine what MacArthur would have done with the Internet. Probably what the troops are already doing with it.
Story Here