Comments

NO - there are two types of peeps, Those who Blog, and those who WONT !!

Posted by /pd at January 14, 2005 12:23 PM

Brings to mind the challenges/opportunities blogging poses for the military, especially here in the US: 1st Amend/Constitution vs UCMJ, unsupervised/uncensored sharing of from-the-trenches, as-it-happens info, morale, that line between sharing info with an interested, right-to-know American public and passing along intel to the enemy, and so on.

http://strategypage.com/dls/articles/200410320.asp

Posted by Russell A. Hatfield Jr. at January 14, 2005 12:39 PM

Don't think for a minute that blogging has anything to do with this phenomenom. Junior officers have been behaving like this since there was a military. Senior officers go to war with the doctrines they learned as junior officers. Junior officers adapt it and develop new doctrine on the fly. That's the way good military systems have always worked.

Posted by Mike Gardner at January 14, 2005 12:54 PM

I agree, Mike. There is always that tension(tension is positive, IMO) arising out of the gap between those on the fringes(jr officers, in this case) who are adapting/integrating more readily/nuturally/quickly and the institution/mass itself battling history/tradition/inherent challenges of scale.

It's evolution(revolution?). A mutation of the 'ol skool way happening in days/weeks/months instead of millenia. The need/challenge to adapt and the process itself is exciting.

Posted by Russell A. Hatfield Jr. at January 14, 2005 2:00 PM

Aside from the intel concerns (which I do think are worth investigating) blogging and instant messaging is a huge deal. Consumers want information when they want it and now it's available in a variety of ways. I can see a day when a war is waged by text-messaging one another on a cell phone. Then again, maybe that already is happening. ;-)

Posted by M. R. Maguire at January 14, 2005 3:42 PM

This boomer-X tension has been around for a long time, and the blog/wiki/im is just the most recent manifestation of it. I think that in the 90s, when I was on active duty, the boomers held the advantage - partially because they were still present in large numbers at the edge of the network - the field grade and below officer billets and E6 - E7 SNCO billets. That isn't the case anymore, as over time the remaining boomers have been promoted, they have essentially retreated to the core of the network.

Back then, the back-channel was controlled by the boomers, and they created connections based on activities - golf, Masons, motorcycles, time spent at the same duty station, Annapolis graduates - but those connections were small bandwidth. All of a sudden the gen X guys come along and become the company commanders and battalion staff at the same time as the technology provides collaborative, ad-hoc p2p tools - and they are modeling the same behavior as their boomer predecessors, still using the back-channel, still keeping the lines of communication open with the peers they trust even if the Pentagon won't let them be stationed together, and it creates explosive change in how work gets done.

It strengthens these virtual organizations and their virtual command structures because they can now operate much closer to real-time. If the 'righteous' communication networks were allowed to function like this (most of them were capable of it by 1996) the strict, time-in-service heirarchy of the military would face a much stronger challenge from the meritocratic who-do-I-trust heirarchy of the back-channel. Maybe that would be a good thing, but if it has hit the skyline too soon the old school will crush it, the same way they crushed personal satellite phones early on in the campaign and camera phones after Abu Ghraib.

The boomers in the military, a few visonaries exempted, equate command with control, and if you lose control of the most trusted communication medium, then you lose control of the paradigms that influence the troops and the enemy; you lose control of the zeitgeist. Commanders who rule from above and behind can't allow this to happen, so they overreact and try to micromanage the flow of information.

So, are there two kinds of people? Yes - those who are afraid of losing control, and those who know control is an illusion. Blogs are just the tool de jeur for coping with a world of illusionary control.

Posted by Ian Smith at January 14, 2005 4:26 PM

I'm not sure that I'd just say "those who blog and those who don't".

I doubt those military guys are using blogging software, but probably other things like old-fashioned discussion fora.

The key thing with blogs is the number of people involved and just how easy it is. You want to get publishing on a subject? Go to www.blogger.com and in 10 minutes you are going. You can write about almost anything. The key is that central control is slipping. This is going to be really hard to control or manage by corporations. This isn't a "press pack" where they know the game, where an exclusive interview can guarantee something.

Posted by Tim Almond at January 14, 2005 5:00 PM

There some validpoints which Ian and Russell articulate.

Firstly, when on the job don't blog. I see no reason for a front line warrior to blog. His /her duty is to protect and serve..not blog. Secondly, if there is a need to blog there are reporters out there who do it.. e.g kevinsites. who broke the story and wrote the blog 'open letter to the devil dogs of 3.01' Link :http://www.kevinsites.net/2004_11_21_archive.html#110107420331292115

canada viagra mastercard Ian, has a good point on "afraid of losing control' , this is not isolated to the army only, its the market /companys in general , who are suddenly understanding that the person is in control and not them. Thus the fear factor.. However, the Commander should not and cannot loose control of the flow of information. Thats the essence of warfare.. in any place and any time..and when one looses control, then its all TARFU..and no diplo-dink can then do damage control after that..!!

Posted by /pd at January 14, 2005 8:41 PM

Mike Gardner, agree that junior officers doing their thing is nothing new--that was me in Danang RVN in 1966-1968. But the new tools signal a step shift--the ability of JOs to act, effectively, en masse to subvert the hierarchy! Cool! As the authors of the Cluetrain Manifesto put it, "Hyperlinks subvert hierarchies." Amen!

Posted by tom peters at January 18, 2005 4:30 AM