Lip-zip sinks Army blogs?
The Army has ordered a halt on soldiers' blogs.
A new directive requires U.S. soldiers to consult a commander before every post to a personal blog, Wired reports.
The rules could even extend to comments on Internet message boards, resumes or letters home, the article states.
Releasing classified information has, of course, always been prohibited, but observers say the new rules focus on seemingly innocuous information that may be revealing to enemies.
Blog community response:
"It's been a constant struggle for the services to balance the rights of free speech with the genuine need to keep information useful to the enemy out of his hands ? especially in the electronic media world. The updated regulations give a lot of leeway to unit commanders to regulate the information flow from their soldiers, but one has to wonder whether superiors will err on the side of caution and ban out of hand all blogs authored by troops on deployment."
--DefenseTech.org
"This is wrong in so many ways. The guys and gals that fight for 'freedom of speech' for Iraqi's can't even practice that freedom for themselves."
--The Morningwood News
"Ever seen written letters with black bars through half of the words? That's how the military's been doing it for ages now, but in the digital world that's not exactly going to work. So they ban blogs to prevent the spread of intelligence to the enemy. There's absolutely nothing wrong with this policy. It will likely save the lives of servicemen and others in Iraq."
--Digg
"While I will admit to not regularly following any blogs written by active duty soldiers on the ground in Iraq, I do count on them to keep the MSM honest with their Iraq reporting. Military bloggers provide a check on a media establishment that may have a vested interest in letting a big disturbing story slip through the cracks or who choose to report administration propaganda without critical examination. I find this very troubling."
--Daily Kos
Margaret is news editor for CNET News, based in the Boston bureau. She also oversees the CNET Blog Network. E-mail Margaret. 
- It is what it is...
- by BigDaddyDozer May 2, 2007 9:10 AM PDT
- Not that I would ever disagree with anyone... But one thing that you have to understand is that a soldier in the military may not have all the most basic rights afforded to them. That is the cost of enlisting in the military.
- Like this Reply to this comment
-
-
- You Go Big Daddy!
- by mgee99 May 2, 2007 9:37 AM PDT
- Well said... And the reality of their chosen lifestyle is that young Soldiers, Sailors, Airmen and Marines are trained to provide the protection we need, to be allowed to have the luxury of Free Speech in a Free Country. Very few, I mean very few, are trained in the art of intelligence. What you and I find harmless, common conversation can be a riveting wellspring of information to those who make it their business to harm us through intelligence gathering. And in a long conflict... we can all become complacent. Someone else has said... that potentially many could be saved by this policy, I'd like to add... that if even one is saved, it will be worth it.
- Like this
-
- Agreed.
- by Penguinisto May 2, 2007 8:44 PM PDT
- I took the oaths, and I've done the time.
- Like this
-
(3 Comments)I guarantee you that if a commander thinks something is going on in a soldier's barracks room he can enter, without provocation, and search the premises. If the police did this to you or I, we'd be getting apologies from the city and state governments as everything they found would be inadmissible.
However... soldiers are not afforded the luxury of all the democratic trappings of society. And YOU KNOW THIS WHEN YOU ENLIST. I knew it when I signed up. I knew it when I arrived in one of those buses at basic and I knew it the day I graduated basic training. The Armed Forces are not a democracy. In the end, some sacrifices of personal liberty ARE sacrificed to become a soldier. And this is necessary.
While it is sad that this may seem tough or even wrong, it isn't. When you sign that piece of paper, you waive certain rights. And you know you do.
If you were drafted... you might have a point... but the constitutionality of the draft was upheld... So then again maybe you wouldn't.
This isn't new, either... ask any military spouse or family member from WWII who got a lette, opened the envelope, and found swiss cheese where a letter had been due to censors cutting out words from the paper.
/P