Blogging to Increase the Army’s Credibility

Encouraging Soldiers to blog demonstrates a willingness to truthfully share our stories. Nothing will be more self-defeating than to be perceived as dishonest whether when speaking to the media or posting to a personal blog. The American public perceives that the military is willing to and does provide inaccurate information to the media. Additionally, the media believes the military is restrictive in providing access and that officers are not encouraged to speak with reporters. Soldier blogs can help change this perception. While a Soldier blogging is not the same as engaging face-to-face with reporters, it is still a way to show our interest in being open and honest when disclosing information about events that they have been a part of. In order to further demonstrate openness and honesty, Soldiers should blog under their own name and be transparent about their rank, experience, and type of military occupation. Many like to blog under creative pseudonyms, but by posting under their own name credibility will be easier to achieve. This is not asking for something extraordinary: nearly half of all bloggers already blog under their own name.

Encouraging Soldiers to blog about personal experiences will result in two potential outcomes. First, traditional media sources will pick up on the stories being published on blogs as many examples over the past few years prove they’ll do. Secondly, if there is a preponderance of these stories in the blogosphere and they are being read, shared, and linked to, perhaps mainstream media will see the appetite that exists and begin to publish more such stories on their own initiative.

The most important and interesting story for Soldiers to tell is their own. However, the Army can gain more strategic impact on public opinion if Soldiers blog entries corroborate the stories being told through official channels. By this I do not mean that the Soldiers simply repeat what official press releases say. If Soldiers are seen as puppets, this would have a detrimental impact on their credibility. If, however, the stories Soldiers tell further enlighten and personalize the information from press releases or other stories in main stream media, this could have a positive impact for the Army.

One way to accomplish this is to provide talking points for Soldiers to consider when blogging. This is no different than what we currently do in operations where Soldiers may have contact with mainstream media. The Army provides talking points to Soldiers to prepare them to intelligently engage the media about current operations. Soldiers are not simply given phrases to repeat to any question; rather, they are informed of the operation’s intent, provided with some background and key points that we desire the public to hear, and then instructed to talk about what they know and what they do – to “stay in their lane.” What I propose is that this same model be applied to the blogosphere. Provide Soldiers with their command’s talking points and encourage them to blog about what they know and what they do. When doing so, it must be made clear that Soldiers are not demanded to always include talking points in their blog entries. Rather, the Army should educate Soldiers about the strategic impact that blogging can have, inform them of the higher commanders’ intents, and allow them to tell stories of their choosing in their own words.

They don't forget when you lie!

A recent comment about the Scott Beauchamp case led me to an article in the American Thinker. The bottom line here is: if you think you can get away with lying, you're probably wrong (at least in the long term). And the corollary to this: if you get caught lying publicly, people won't soon forget.

I bring this up only as to reiterate what we've discussed here before. One of the first rules of blogging (and, specifically, milblogging) is to do so with complete integrity. Milblogs have the potential for tremendous impact on public opinion - as long as they are viewed as credible, trustworthy, sources. One foul move and that credibility is destroyed. Unfortunately, I expect that credibility is not just destroyed for that single source. It is likely that other milblogs will be seen with similar skepticism.

Strategic impact of Soldier blogs

Back in November, I posted some thoughts about how Soldier blogging fits into the fundamentals of information. Now, I'd like to investigate how it meshes into strategic communication principles. Some may think it's a bit of a stretch to take the blog of an individual Soldier and expect to gain anything strategic from it. But hear me out ... and weigh in on it!

Strategic communication (SC) is a term for which it is difficult to find an agreed upon definition. Joint Publication 5-0 defines it as “focused US Government efforts to understand and engage key audiences in order to create, strengthen, or preserve conditions favorable for the advancement of US Government interests, policies, and objectives through the use of coordinated programs, plans, themes, and products synchronized with the actions of all instruments of power.” The same publication goes on to state that proper “SC planning establishes unity of US themes and messages, emphasizes success, accurately confirms or refutes external reporting on US operations, and reinforces the legitimacy of US goals.” (p II-2)

The Report by the Defense Science Board Task Force on Strategic Communication describes SC as “a sustained and coherent set of activities that include: understanding identities, attitudes, behaviors, and cultures, … advising policymakers, diplomats, and military commanders on the public opinion and communication implications of their strategic and policy choices, … engaging in a dialogue of ideas, … influencing attitudes and behavior through communication strategies, … and measuring the impact of activities.” (pp 10-11) Halloran articulates the ideas of SC in less formal language when he writes that SC “is a way of persuading other people to accept one’s ideas, policies, or courses of action. … [It] means persuading allies and friends to stand with you, … neutrals to come to your side, … adversaries that you have the power and the will to prevail over them, … [and] the nation’s citizens to support the policies of their leaders so that a national will is forged.” (p 6)

Taken together, these definitions and descriptions of strategic communication suggest that SC is not something that is only done by the highest levels of government. Additionally, they infer that SC is about much more than simply crafting and transmitting specific messages. Finally, they all articulate the importance of dialogue in communication; and this dialogue requires understanding of your audience, a willingness to listen, not just speak, and trust from those to whom we wish to communicate. With this understanding, new media use by individual Soldiers offers a unique way to accomplish some SC objectives.

To further explain how the military can implement SC, the Department of Defense published a guide describing the nine principles of strategic communication. These principles are: leadership-driven, credible, dialogue, unity of effort, responsive, understanding, pervasive, results-based, and continuous. By examining each of these principles, we can see how Soldiers engaging new media – specifically blogging – can serve to accomplish SC.

Three of the principles, leadership-driven, unity of effort, and results-based, require leadership action. Leadership-driven means that leaders must control the process; they must “place communication at the core of everything they do.” In this light, it is reasonable that leaders would develop policies to guide their Soldiers when they write blog entries and these leaders would also educate and equip their Soldiers to enable them to be effective blog writers. Unity of effort implies vertical and horizontal integration and coordination. In order to achieve this, Soldiers must be empowered and trusted to communicate via new media. Leaders also have an important role to “coordinate and synchronize capabilities and instruments of power within their area of responsibility.” Soldiers blogging is a new form of power that leaders now have at their disposal. SC is results-based in that it must focus on specific outcomes and then communicate to all in the organization the target audiences and themes they wish to communicate. Just as talking points are provided to Soldiers on patrol in case they are approached by the media, these talking points can be taken into consideration when Soldiers voluntarily approach the new media.

Credibility is built on trust, accuracy, and consistency. Over time, it is quite possible that bloggers can develop credibility – in fact, it has been found that individual Soldiers are generally accepted as more credible than professional spokespeople.(p 13) Concerning understanding of cultures, since the primary audience for most milbloggers is the domestic audience, there is not much concern about this principle. Dialogue is a principle that is well-suited for application in the blogosphere, since that is one of the primary benefits of new media: a back-and-forth dialogue between potentially many individuals. We understand the importance of the pervasive communication when it comes to Soldiers on patrol. There has been much discussion about the “strategic corporal” and the impact that decisions in combat of very junior service members can have in the strategic environment. That same junior service member can have a similar impact by engaging the public through blogging. To be responsive, information must be timely and presented to people who are interested in it. The social aspect of blogging enables better responsiveness as Soldiers can provide tailored information to their regular readers or post comments to other specific blogs. The final principle is concerns the continuous nature of SC: it is not something that we just do at specific times and ignore it the rest of the time. Blogs are particularly well-suited to this principle as they are often maintained on a weekly – or sometimes daily – basis, and can therefore be continuously engaging their audience on issues important to the Army.

Our current enemy has been particularly adept at using new media to their advantage. Many have written about this in an effort to energize better use of these emerging internet technologies by the United States. For example, Josten writes that “today’s form of terrorism is essentially strategic communication in the purest definition – message and action – utilizing the global communications network more to influence than inform.” (p 19) BG Eder expresses the concern that “many, especially in the military, are worried that our enemies have already occupied and dominated the infosphere battlespace.” Finally, Kimmange and Ridolfo write that “Sunni insurgents in Iraq and their supporters worldwide are exploiting the Internet to pursue a massive and far-reaching media campaign … [and] the popularity of online Iraqi Sunni insurgent media reflects a genuine demand for their message in the Arab world.” (p 3) It is clear that today’s terrorist networks have the advantage of having made effective use of internet capabilities before we have. This does not suggest that this particular battle is lost. Rather, by modifying our policies and seeking new and creative ways to engage new media, the Army can take back this piece of virtual terrain and again seize the advantage.

A bit more on defensive blogging

Well, this blog got its first firestorm of comments after I chose to use a recent story to get discussion going about "defensive blogging." The story is about Corps of Engineers employees posting comments on a website about the New Orleans levee system. While most of the comments about my blog entry were about the details of the case - which was not the primary subject of my post - there are several good lessons and highlights that have come out of this experience. I'll summarize them as TTPs for defensive blogging actions.

ALWAYS TELL THE TRUTH: NON-NEGOTIABLE. In the comments, New Orleans Ladder said "it is never a good idea for the Army to lie to the American people on American soil with American Tax-paid computers." I couldn't agree more! In my opinion, this is a must - no discussion! Also in the comments, Ms. Rosenthall (posting as WateryHill) wrote in response to a comment by Adam S., "I am just an American citizen, but I do not understand why you say for the Army to fabricate information and call it facts, that the Army is telling 'its side of the story.'" If what was being posted was, in fact, fabricated information, then the person posting it is wrong and is doing more harm than good for their cause and for the Army. Since the idea of defensive blogging is to correct or complete a story then the information a Soldier leaves on anothers blog must be completely accurate. I've written a little about this in the past when discussing credibility and how Soldier's blogging fits in the fundamentals of information.

BE HONEST ABOUT WHO YOU ARE. Also in the comments, Ms. Rosenthall wrote "The commenter 'stevonawlins' is on record saying he does not work for the Corps, meanwhile his comment originated from Corps Headquarters in New Orleans." There appears to be a disconnect in this case - either his claim or the IP address is false. I won't hypothesize here about which it is, because the more important point is that if you are a government employee - Soldier or civilian - and you are posting information about something your organization is involved in, then you owe it to the people to be honest about who you are. This is one of the rules that are followed in CENTCOM's defensive blogging exploits - and it is appreciated and respected by the authors of the blogs being commented on by CENTCOM's team. This is also what I've done when leaving comments on others blogs, and what Ms. Rosenthall did when leaving comments on this blog. Of course, there may be some security risks that are being taken by exposing your identity on-line, but, as Mike's 25 axioms for blogging points out, there are ways to protect yourself by carefully choosing what you write about.

ENGAGE THE ISSUES, NOT THE PEOPLE. Some people may like the personal bashing that is not uncommon in the blogosphere, but for professional discussions it should remain professional. And one very common rule for professional debate is to engage the issues, not the people. For example, New Orleans Ladder wrote in the comments, "blog etiquette dictates a civil response to a civil question from a post's subject." He's right; he asked me to address the issue raised by Ms. Rosenthall without attacking me. When one side decides to begin bashing the other, the discussion can quickly degenerate into something that is completely useless. By engaging the issues real discussion occurs and, hopefully, solutions are found. As Soldiers in the blogosphere, much like when we're visiting with friends or family or walking around town, we leave perceptions about us as individuals and people often generalize about all Soldiers from those perceptions that we create. We must take advantage of the opportunity for people to see that we are professionals - just as they can see in the accomplishment of the missions we are assigned. This may be a bit of a challenge, especially if you choose to leave comments on a website that is clearly anti-military or has engaged in hateful rhetoric, but we must always remain professional, even when we disagree with someone's ideas or opinions.

These three TTPs should be simple for us to follow. I'm interested to hear from those of you that may have engaged in a defensive blogging mission. Share your experiences in the comments to this post. Thanks!

P.S. for a great example of effective defensive blogging, take the time to read the comments to my original post on this subject. Ms. Rosenthall and others were effective at ensuring I had the complete and correct story, they were primarily professional in tone, and they were clearly passionate about the subject. It's just one more example of the power of back-and-forth that can occur in this new media.

Fill the gap: milbloggers roles in communicating with the nation

By this point in my reading, research, and dialogue with the readers of this blog, I’m now completely convinced that we (the Army) must do more in the blogosphere. Really, we need to do more with new media in general, but for this post I’m restricting comment to blogs. Knowing that we must do more, there has been some valuable discussion about how we can encourage and educate Soldiers to effectively engage the blogosphere. Some useful tips to consider when blogging have been offered; justification for Soldiers’ blogs has been provided in light of the fundamentals of information espoused by the public affairs community; and discussion about the need for credibility has begun.

I turn my attention in this post to some things we should encourage Soldiers to blog about: what I’ll call “filling the gap.”

What gap I am talking about? The gap between what the media thinks the American public wants to hear and what the American public actually wants to hear. Contained in a book we read for class here about military-media relations were survey results that supported what I’d been thinking/guessing for a long time – main stream media is a bit out of sync with main street America. The book (The Military-Media Relationship 2005), a report by the McCormick Tribune Foundation, is based on surveys conducted of the public, military members, and members of the media as well as round table discussion involving representatives of both the military and media. The discussion and several graphs (which are referenced below) provide valuable insight into what blog topics may be the most interesting to the American public. If the Army is to encourage Soldiers to blog it is the following items/topics that should be specifically encouraged.

1. Stories about the rebuilding effort. Charts 1A and 1B (p 50, 51) clearly show that the media overestimates the public interest in coverage of terrorist activities and even more strikingly underestimates the public’s desire for stories about the reconstruction effort. Knowing this, Soldiers can fill a significant need – tell stories about their involvement in reconstruction. There are many engineer Soldiers out there today rebuilding schools and hospitals (and have been doing so for quite some time!) There are many medical Soldiers deployed right now who are helping to provide needed care to many who haven’t had such care in quite some time. There are many civil affairs Soldiers who have been involved in helping to establish local governmental organizations and are helping demonstrate the legitimacy of the Iraqi government. These Soldiers need to have their stories told – and main stream media isn’t doing it to the degree that the American public desire. So let’s blog about our experiences! (By-the-way, Chart 1B also shows that the public wants to hear more stories about individual Soldiers – and what better source than the Soldiers themselves through their blogs.)

2. Positive stories about events in Iraq and Afghanistan. To begin this discussion, it is clear that stories that are not inherently positive must not be spun into something they are not. Nor can negative stories be ignored or brushed under the carpet. The American public absolutely has a right to know the full costs of the endeavor we are currently engaged in. However, Chart 13 (p 70) shows that while 68% of the media believes they provide balanced information, 70% the public sees the coverage as predominately negative! So, what can Soldiers do about this? Provide their own coverage of the many positive events that are occurring on a daily basis while remaining real and fair about what it is really like to serve as a Soldier in these current wars. This blends nicely with item 1 above – stories about reconstruction efforts are inherently positive.

3. Demonstrate willingness to share our stories and be truthful when doing so. Nothing will be more self-defeating than to be perceived as dishonest whether when speaking to the media or writing our own blogs. The American public’s perception is that the military is willing (and does) provide inaccurate information to the media – Chart 12 (p 69) shows this. Charts 8A and 8B (p 62, 63) infer that the media believes the military to be restrictive in providing access and that officers are not encouraged to speak with reporters. Extrapolating from this a bit, I suggest that blogs provide an outlet to help change this perception. While a Soldier blogging is not the same as engaging face-to-face with reporters, it is still a way to show our interest in being open and honest when disclosing information about events we’ve been a part of.

If the traditional media is not going to provide the information and stories that the public wants, using new media is the best way I can think of to do so. There are a couple possible outcomes if we can be successful at doing this. First, traditional media sources will pick up on the stories being published on blogs (as many examples over the past few years prove they’ll do). Secondly, if there is a preponderance of these stories in the blogosphere and they’re getting read, shared, and linked to then perhaps traditional sources will see the appetite that exists and will begin to publish more such stories on their own initiative. The first outcome I’m hopeful would happen; the second I’m a bit more doubtful about (quiet the cynic in me!) but would be very pleased to see occur.

So, I’m curious about what you think of these ideas. Am I naïve? Would Soldiers latch on to such guidance? Or, do most Soldiers do this anyway through their blogs? Leave your comments here and enter the discussion.

Results are in: 3 out of 5 blog to keep family and friends updated

Last week's poll asked what prompted you to enter the blogosphere. Most (3 out of 5 ... yes, only 5 responses this week, again quite unscientific) said the primary reason was to keep family and friends updated while deployed or out of the country for other reasons. 40% (2 people)said that is was because they felt strongly about a topic. I certainly realize these polls are not scientific and are, therefore, not valid for adding to the academic discussion (congratulations, by-the-way, to the Milblogging.com webmaster - The World's Coolest Dad!). They are, however, a source for some commentary ... and, perhaps a way to generate some more discussion. Thanks again to the participants -- now PASS THIS LINK ON SO MORE PEOPLE WILL VOTE IN THE FUTURE!!

Despite the very low sample size, the results corroborate what I'm finding as I survey milblogs. The majority, so far, exist (at least at first) simply to share stories with folks back home. Several of the top ranking milblogs then morphed into something a bit more - reaching a broader audience. But, even those that have grown large readerships remain primarily focused on sharing accounts of events that the author has been involved in. These personal accounts are what seem to attract many people to milblogs - stories that they can't get from main stream media. This also, by-the-way, matches the reasons that you stated you read milblogs - to get the Soldiers' sides of the story and their opinions about it.

As I see it, there's not much the Army can do to change the motivation for Soldiers to try their hand at blogging - it's not something we can (or, admittedly, want) to do. However, for those that are interested in a way to keep family and friends up-to-date as they're deployed, a blog offers a great method! And, importantly, the Army should do a much better job at educating them to blog as effectively as possible because, unlike e-mail or an old-fashioned letter home, blogs are immediately accessible by anyone who wants to read. Therefore, every Soldiers blog is a piece of the Army's communications whether we like to admit that or not. Not that every Soldiers blog should be controlled by the Army (in fact, as discussed previously, even the perception of control detracts from the credibility.) But just as we owe it to our Soldiers to train them to be successful with the various weapon systems they use, we owe it to them to train/educate them to be as successful as possible using new media.

The detailed (?) results from the poll, if you're interested ...

What triggered your entry into the blogosphere?

• 3 (60%) Wanted to keep family/friends updated while I was deployed/away.
• 0 (0%) Wasn't satisfied with what was out there about the war(s), so I started my own blog to write about it.
• 0 (0%) I enjoyed online discussions so started a blog to control one.
• 0 (0%) Really enjoy writing, so a blog seemed like an obvious thing for me to start.
• 2 (40%) Felt strongly about a topic (wars or otherwise) and wanted to write about it.
• 0 (0%) Just wanted a place to rant, share my opinions, etc.

Soldiers would consider "talking points" when blogging

The results of this blog's first very unscientific survey are in ... Soldiers are willing to consider their commands "talking points" when blogging. Thanks to the 8 (yeah, before this is a legitimate finding, probably need to have a larger survey sample) who took the poll. Results of the poll were:

As a Soldier blogger, would you consider your command's "talking points" when writing?

• 0 (0%) Absolutely, I'd find ways to incorporate them
• 5 (62%) I'd consider them, can't promise I'd incorporate them
• 1 (12%) I'd ignore them and write just as I do now
• 2 (25%) It would irritate me; like they were trying to control me

While this is an encouraging finding, the fact that 25% said that providing talking points would irritate them is concerning. This leads me to believe that should a command decide to provide talking points to their Soldiers for this purpose, they should clearly explain the purpose of them and make certain that their Soldiers understand they are under no pressure to incorporate them. I also wonder if Soldiers are irritated when provided talking points when out on patrol. My instinct says "no", because they likely understand the need in that circumstance. We'd need to help them understand the need (value) when blogging - to provide big picture understanding. The last thing we want is for Soldiers to feel that they are being manipulated. Just as bad, we don't want the public (the readers of milblogs) to believe that Soldiers are simply puppets; their credibility depends on their individualism when blogging.

Of course, we should use caution when extrapolating much from this poll - given the very small sample. The next poll is up (look to the right). Please consider voicing your opinion through the poll. Thanks!

Toward a new Army blogging policy ...

When determining how best to prepare Soldiers for “aggressive” blogging, my starting point is the military’s public affairs guidance in JP 3-61. This publication outlines the fundamentals of information which are: tell the truth, provide timely information, practice security at the source, provide consistent information at all levels, and tell the DOD story (p1-5,1-6). Let’s investigate how each of these can be applied to a Soldier when in the blogosphere.

• Tell the truth – well, that can’t be said much more clearly. With integrity as one of our core values and the importance of honesty in all we do, this fundamental of information is already a fundamental of soldiering. Interestingly, the authors of a study on credibility state that “people have a general distrust of public relations professionals … individuals ‘from the field’ are perceived as having a higher degree of competence and are viewed as less likely to deceive” (p13). This finding certainly suggests the value of information directly from Soldiers, and blogs are a great way to transmit that information.


• Provide timely information – this is where blogs offer a key advantage over other forms of traditional PA. As the authors of “Engaging the Blogosphere: A Joint Public Affairs Best Practice” (from the Joint Public Affairs Support Element (JPASE), an enabling organization of U.S. Joint Forces Command) suggest, blogging “empowers the average person, regardless of their background and qualifications, to rapidly distribute both information and analysis” (emphasis mine). JP 3-61 further discusses the importance of timely information: “The first side that presents the information sets the context and fames the public debate. It is extremely important to get factual, complete, truthful information out first” (p1-4). As long as Soldiers are cleared to discuss the issue/mission/event, blogs are about the quickest way to get information out. And what a better source for that information than a Soldier or Soldiers who were there!


• Practice security at the source – admittedly, this is the single most concerning detail about blogging. Ensuring our Soldiers practice security when blogging requires two things: proper education and trust. Proper education comes in several forms, one of which already exists as a regular training requirement for soldiers. Annually, every Soldier must attend a training session about OPSEC. This training is conducted at the unit level and typically consists of standard training material coupled with pertinent information specific to their unit and/or location. Simply adding some discussion about how the principles of OPSEC apply to all manners of transmitting information (phone calls, e-mail, and blogging) would help ensure Soldiers understand all aspects of OPSEC. Additionally, in accordance with the Army's current blogging policy, before a Soldier is authorized to blog about anything pertaining to the military, they must have a conversation with their commander and their unit security officer. The security officer has an important role to talk in detail with that Soldier about OPSEC as it applies to their blog and the things they should be very careful about when blogging. An article about OPSEC in the discusses some of the security concerns about Soldier blogging.


• Provide consistent information at all levels – like security, this also provides some concern for commanders. Consistency is critical when presenting a story. In fact, inconsistency brings credibility into question. Consistency in this regard does not mean every level must be telling the same story verbatim; rather, each person/level’s story must marry up properly without contradicting each other. For this reason, PAOs often publish “talking points” for Soldiers throughout an organization to use when interacting with the media. As discussed in an earlier post, ensuring Soldiers understand that these talking points apply also when their blogging can help prevent contradictions. This must be done with care because we certainly don’t want to “use” our Soldiers nor do we want that to be the perception. In the case of blogs, I believe “talking points” and “command messages” can be used to help our Soldiers see the bigger picture and better understand how they fit into that picture. This understanding will likely influence their writing and help ensure consistency.


• Tell the DOD story – like “tell the truth,” I can’t say this one much more clearly and blogs are one great way to help accomplish this fundamental. Several commands (i.e. US Army Combined Arms Center and the US Army Corps of Engineers) but most are primarily for internal communication: keeping the command informed, seeking ideas from the organization, and generating discussion from within. Some of the posts are about current events/actions within the command that help keep the country informed. By encouraging Soldiers to blog about their experiences, we can take this one step further by providing more information of interest to (and, arguably, needed by) the public we serve.

I think it is clear that Soldiers in the blogosphere have a very important role to play. In order to ensure they are properly trained and equipped for this mission – just as we must ensure for every mission – well thought out programs and policies will be required. This is where the bulk of my project lies. LTG Caldwell has published a blogging policy for the US Army Combined Arms Center which provides a great starting point for an Army-wide policy.

Keeping it credible ...

Some great feedback from yesterday's post inquiring about how to educate Soldiers to be effective bloggers. Thanks! This interaction - bouncing ideas around and hearing your thoughts - has gotten me fired up about this project. I appreciate your comments ... keep them coming!

There are a couple of key points that came up throughout the comments I want to highlight here which all seem to speak to one idea - credibility. Without credibility we get nowhere ... check that, we go backwards. And that's not what I'm looking for.

If the Army truly decides to encourage Soldier blogging, then we've got to be willing to accept the good with the bad. This is hard for many leaders to accept and, I suspect, one of the big reasons we haven't embraced this idea yet. In fact, I hinted around at this problem in my earlier posts when I mentioned getting "good news out there." Obviously, that would be the primary intent, but along with that, we must accept that all there is to say is not necessarily "good news." If it looks like government produced propaganda, it won't be respected as credible information. If it seems like nothing but cheerleading it won't be of as much interest and will likely lose credibility. In a way, I guess, keeping it real keeps it credible.

Another comment made concerned the role of Public Affairs Officers (PAO) in this process. I agree with LT N's comment and Galrahn's elaboration that if all we want to do is get the official messages out then PA's fully qualified to do this. He's exactly right that I'm thinking about much more than that - I want to get more Soldier's stories out as part of the Army story. And PA can't do that as effectively as Soldier's themselves. There's just something inherently credible hearing about someone's experiences, challenges, thoughts, from that person - not through some filter. Of course there's a vital role for PA and mainstream media. I'm just looking for a way to round it out, add a bit more variety.

Now, could PA have a role in blogging? Obviously, if the command has a blog PA will be involved. But what about their role in any old Soldier blog? Would a Soldier be willing to consider the talking points developed by PAs? Would making our Soldier's aware of the messages their command is trying to send help them better frame their blog posts? Or would it detract from their credibility?

I think that if we were to provide these communication tools to our Soldiers "with no strings attached" it could only help. The reason I say this is because of the value of knowing the bigger picture when you're reflecting on your part of that picture. My personal experience has been that I can make a lot better sense about what my organization and I are up to when I truly understand what my higher commander's intent and vision is - some basic principles from developing orders that I think could apply well to the world of blogging.