19 February 2008

Virtual Explosion: warfare, intelligence, and operational security concerns over the blogosphere

Arguably, the greatest challenge that any global corporation with a 1-million person interchangeable and mobile workforce operating in a highly volatile market can face is that of communication. Throw in a rigid hierarchical culture and an uncompromising need for security and secrecy and you get the problems faced by all military members.

Indeed, it was these security and secrecy issues that made me hesitant to even begin this blog. Given that these concerns are still so evident within the online military community, I was not surprised to find very little training discussions taking place in public forums. Most of the easily available 'military' blogs, similar to the one pictured to the left, are highly-charged emotional journals belonging to deployed service members.

Thus was the status-quo when I dawned my virtual battle-rattle and trekked into the blogosphere looking for valid training discussions. Ironically, I discovered that one of the loudest and continuous debates going on in the military blogosphere is about the use of that same blogosphere (call it social media, web 2.0 or whatever seems most appropriate) in military training, public relations, and operations. Currently, there are only a few web 2.0 communities within the internet designed for professional military members to discuss operations and training issues. Pictured further below is a website originally founded by 4 West Point graduates. It is designed with the intent of providing company commanders (leaders of 200-300 man elements) a forum in which they can share experiences and advice.

Though I read through many, many blogs, I chose to comment on two. (These comments are posted below for convenience, but can also be read on the blogs themselves by clicking here and here).

The first blog, Intel 2.o, is the official blog for a social media research company. As far as I can tell, it is authored by the company founder Guy Hagen. Both Mr. Hagen and his company boast impressive credentials. I chose this blog for its level of professionalism and expertise as well as the fact that it was vague enough to cultivate questions.

The second blog I chose to comment on is from a less reputable, though still valid and intriguing, source. The author of 'Jesserwilson's Weblog' claims to be a dedicated government employee in his mid-twenties. Though he lacks viable credentials, he links his posts to good resources and demonstrates a high quality of language, rhetoric, and subject matter knowledge within his posts. I chose to comment on this blog because his arguments were professional and, as such, invited open and friendly debate.

My comment on Intel 2.0 post entitled "Military Social Media Intelligence."

First of all, I’d like to compliment not only the content of this blog but also extend admiration of the scope and depth of the services Innovation Insight provides. I am a student at the University of Southern California and am in the process of composing a blog dedicated solely to the discussion of contemporary trends in military training. Your blog interests me because it touches on some major concerns that have resulted out of both the current war as well as the virtual (no pun intended) explosion of technology.

Under the ‘Training’ category listed in your post, you shift gears to the example of video-games. While I recognize the tremendous possibilities that integrated video-games represent for training, I do find it curious that the DOD has yet to cultivate the same interest in other forms of social media, such as blogging, wikis, and video sharing. The categorical summaries and the links you provide (particularly the ‘Milblogs in the news’ link) depict that the DOD’s outlook on blogging and/or wikis is merely from a public relations standpoint.

It is easy to understand why the DOD subscribes to the public relations’ point-of-view. The majority of ‘military’ blogs available by conducting a common websearch are highly subjective, emotional journal entries that relate personal experience through storytelling. These kinds of blogs are, as should be expected, high security risks because they are posted in public forums and often reveal critical information concerning troop movements, operations planning, and troop morale.

Were personnel introduced to the blogosphere in a formalized training setting and then given comprehensive intranet toolkits, I believe that these forms of social media would have far greater impact on mission outcome than video games, the later merely training prerequisite skills as opposed to the realtime and intelligence-based communications blogs and wikis supply. Blog communities would give commanders the opportunity to change training and combat procedures at critical moments.

With or without the DOD, I have found that soldiers and commanders do recognize the value of this information-sharing medium. One group of officers formed a grass-roots community at http://companycommand.army.mil/ to facilitate professional information sharing. Another, more formalized, information sharing program called CAVNET has had several recorded success stories in which information passed through the system prevented enemy endeavors.

There are also online communities in the works for use through Army Knowledge Online- the Army’s official personnel intranet service. So far though, the security measures for logging into ‘AKO’ (as it is called) are so rigid would-be users are deterred away. And that doesn’t even get into the interface, software, and load-time issues AKO is traditionally associated with.

So if these mediums have invaluable uses, why is there not more excitement within the military industry to use these outlets? Have there been any field studies into the use of such tools? Aside from operational security issues, what criticisms do DOD and high-ranking military personnel have of social media?

My comment on ‘Jesserwilson’s Weblog’ post entitled “Clearing up Misperceptions of Intellipedia.”

I know I’m entering the forum a little late, but I found myself enthralled by this post. I’d like to join the chorus of praise for the well chosen “We have a command chain, but not an information chain,” quote. This potent remark from a General candidly expresses the theme inherent to all training problems: lack of information fluidity.

Because information breakdown is an obvious and well-known problem to all military members, I am surprised to learn that there is so much resistance to changes that could drastically improve both training and operations. Were it simply a matter of operations security issues, I would have some sympathy, but the way you portray the issue suggests that the real problem is one of military culture (as is evident in your opening story about General Cartwright’s experience with open blogging).

In regards to the ‘seniors won’t use it’ argument, I think that there is some measure of truth in that criticism when applied to the general military population (not military personnel with high tech or extremely computer-oriented jobs), however, as more and more senior positions are taken over by new blood that problem will eventually fade away. I think your opening paragraph summarizes the solution to this problem best, “As hard as it is to imagine (I’m in my mid-twenties), there was a time when there were no word processors to type reports, or email to send messages. Information was typed and distributed hard copy.”

Finally, I’d like to comment on the 3rd criticism you discuss, the perpetuation of bad information. This is completely my opinion, but my experience has taught me that military personnel, as part of their culture, love to criticize and analyze. I would believe it more likely that wikis would end the perpetuation of bad information rather than facilitate it.

Since Intellipedia’s inception in 2006, have there been any notable situations that could be used to make or break the case for the use of wikis in military operations? I understand that your emphasis is on the professional intelligence community, but I am curious as to whether or not you have happened across any interesting bits of ‘intelligence’ that would suggest any interest on behalf of the military to use blogs and/or wikis for general professional discourse.

2 comments:

LB said...

It is readily apparent that you are quite knowledgeable in terms of this field. This is evidenced both by the quality of information you present as well as the valid and insightful questions within yours comments. I felt I came away with a better understanding of military culture and pressing issues within it. Knowing that the military possesses a strong social hierarchy did not factor into my thinking when it came to their information sharing capabilities. As such, I had never previously contemplated how operations could be enhanced and loss of human life reduced if information sharing among officers on the ground were to be improved. I took it for granted that such a network system currently existed.

Your stance on the most common form of military blog, the personal journal, was a bit surprising to me. In the past, I'd recognized the potential of individuals in the military to unintentionally provide sensitive information in their personal blogs. I seem to have also taken it for granted that the military had provided some form of training and/or guidelines to its members so as to decrease the potential for security breaches within blogs. Personally, I've only read the blog of one active servicemen in Iraq. He distinctly stated within it that he would not post any information regarding his military operations within it. I must have extrapolated what I presumed to be military policy regarding social media from the personal decision of one individual. The lack of military policy concerning social media highlights the military's need to create a set of policies surrounding it. I wonder when and how long it will take to for the military to attempt to adapt to the everchanging social imaginary.

Looking at the more technical aspect of your post, I'm a "link-whore." I like links. Lots of them. In your post, you mentioned that there were a few other places in existence where one could go to read about the perspective of various other military personnel in terms of military policy. I don't think you provided enough links to these Web 2.0 communities discussing these matters. Also, you mention CAVNET and do not link to it. I'm not sure if that is because it is not publicly accessible or if the link is lacking because you forgot or for some other reason. Regarding your link-backs to your comments in the original blogs of others, I think that embedding the link into a phrase like "My Comment" is a bit more aesthetically pleasing than embedding the link in the much longer phrases you use to indicate the beginning of a new comment. Yes, this is an instance of the pot calling the kettle black, but I'm working on it [laughs]. Beyond the links, I'd have to say that you are rocking the kasbah.

Anonymous said...

Thanks for the compliments and links. It's something of a mystery to me as well why the military hasn't embraced social media for more applications, but I think the interest might actually be there. I am conducting a focus group next week with several USDOD joint operations offices to talk about social and digital media applications within the industry, so maybe I'll be able to shed some more light on this topic soon.

 
Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 3.0 Unported License.