The Marines are known for knocking over hornets' nests but that wasn't likely what they were after when they released the new policy today: "No more Twitter/Facebook on Marine networks." (paraphrased)
As luck would have it, I had been in communication with Military Officials concerning Twitter and was communicating that to our contributors at the very time that CNN was releasing the news that upset the Twitterverse. I had asked the array of contributors to be on the watch for any PR's related to Twitter and MsMarti had the policy itself posted within minutes of the CNN release. Before I could even read it myself she had already clarified an important point: Marines are not banned from Twitter on their own computers over their non-Military networks.
Still, the policy can appear to be a bit hypocritical when the Army and many Senior Officers, as well as their Regiment of Public Affairs Officers are currently searching out and embracing Social Media as a means of getting the message out at the same time that Network administrators are shutting down the gateways to it. Which is it? Go or Stop Web 2.0 (a term I'm not completely sure I understand.)
Just as the debate of COIN vs Conventional Warfare focus rages on, so does the
debate of wanting Soldiers to tell the Rest of the Story vs. trying to prevent OPSEC and Malware threats. Soldiers have an inherent self-preservation interest that most often overrides thoughts of bragging about their exploits while those exploits can be life threatening and that bragging can get them killed. When I broke the story "Blackfive Blocked on Bagram?" one Troop quickly "corrected the story" even as I interrogated Bagram Gatekeepers on what the rules for blocked sites vs. getting sites unblocked were.
The Servicemember made the point that some safely inside the FOBs were committing OPSEC violations that endangered those that were going outside the walls. We eventually came to a mutual understanding that such behavior should be heavily discouraged, possibly by use of Wall to Wall Counseling, Old School style NCO Leadership that was quick to behavior modification. In the meantime, we had a few verbal fistfights of our own. A point of this new policy and that discussion is that there are malicious websites out there. Another point is that some sites literally suck up bandwidth. Virtually every site wants to "leave a cookie" or five on your computer. The most secure sites won't let you in if you don't allow cookies while the most malicious sites use them to spy on your habits. It would seem that there is a constant battle of security vs. transparency. As a sidenote, I recently found a great tool that allows a middle ground on cookies. IE8 (and perhaps IE7) has an option that allows you to manually decide each time a cookie is requested from a website. And you don't have to answer every time you open your favorite sites. While you may wish to make it a one time decision the first time, you can check the box "always" not for such things as the Google Adsense cookie, while "always" allowing the WOTN or Bank cookie that you need or want (or perhaps simply allow.) After a few days of opening your favorite sites, the annoying messages asking you about cookies decrease and you get a better idea of just how many cookies get put on your computer in the normal mode. (Next, you'll want to erase all those already there!) Just as the 3rd way is best in the COIN v. Conventional Warfare planning cycle, so too is the 3rd way the best option when it comes to internet surfing and Twitter. New things aren't always to be feared (i.e. Twitter) but neither should some guy in the OpCenter be too busy with tweeting to keep up with the goings on of the battlefield. No, Military Clerks don't need to be tweeting away when they should be typing up medals and processing pay for the guys on the line. When you're on duty, you should be doing your duty, not surfing the web for dates while you're on leave. On the other hand, when you're off duty, it's a different matter. Tweet and Blog to your heart's content so long as you keep OPSEC in mind. I'll have no sympathy for you if you're putting a Warriors life on the line to impress someone stateside. It is important that these concepts be discussed and they are being discussed in many of the right places, such as a Student/Major Bruhl as he blogged his way through a joint service school. And the Army was quick today to open the discussion on Social Media Networks when they saw the swarm of hornets of protest to the "Orwellian" policy of banning Marines from Twitter. Weigh in. Tell the Army your thoughts, particularly if you're a tweeting Troop! But don't fall prey to the emotional outrage of policy that is not as marketed by CNN. Take a look at it first. Almost all policies the Military comes up with are designed to protect resources and Troops, even if many of those same policies are later used against the Troops by a few idiots that don't understand them or find power in the misuse. The Marine Policy only bans Marine Networks from being misused for personal purposes while Marines are on duty, and provides the means for arguing the necessity of specific users having access to the banned sites, just as the Bagram policy has the means to overcome specific sites from being banned if they are helpful to the mission.
Stumble It!
