by Rob Paterson
November 29, 2007 at 7:44 am · Filed under
2.0 Design Thinking, Business Model, Culture, Economics, Enterprise 2.0, Facebook, Messy World, Nato, Public Media, Secretary Gates, Social Computing, Social Media, Taliban, Terror, User Revolution, War, Web 2.0, Wisdom of Crowds, videos
Secretary Gates made this statement in a recent speech:
It is just plain embarrassing that al-Qaeda is better at communicating its message on the internet than America. As one foreign diplomat asked a couple of years ago, “How has one man in a cave managed to out-communicate the world’s greatest communication society?” Speed, agility, and cultural relevance are not terms that come readily to mind when discussing U.S. strategic communications (My post at Fast Forward yesterday)
I am starting to see something here. War has been the agency that accelerates the development of key new technology.
In the 1860’s the civil war put the train on the map. Post the war, an enormous track laying boom exploded around the world. The military made the train the backbone of the industrial approach to war.The same with flight. In Europe, the military saw the potential of flight immediately. But the US did not - that is why Rickenbaker flew a Spad.
The Wright Company in particular and American airplane companies in general continue to lose their technological edge to the Europeans. This is due in part to the U.S. Government’s failure to support the fledgling airplane industry. While the governments of England, France, and Germany are buying hundreds of airplanes for their armed forces and supporting aviation research, the United States is spending roughly the same amount of money as Bulgaria. (First to Fly)
By 1918, the future of flight was assured. There were no doubters - and like the adoption of the train, this new way of connecting people has transformed our world.
So back to social software. As impressive as Facebook is, as impressive the growth of blogging - this is all personal. Organizational life and how we all live has not been changed yet. There is immense resistance in the key institutions of our time to its introduction. Leaders in business, education, healthcare etc all fear the outcome of adoption.
The big money is all based in an advertising model. If you can form a large group, you get rewarded. But the true potential of the tool set is not being invested in.
The true potential of social software is that it allows many to many to meet in real time at low to no cost. This means that you can see what is really going on - the business intelligence aspects are immense and transform research as it is conducted today. It enables you to get your message out in a real time and precise way - will transform marketing. Most of all it enables people to have very different relationships. Large, central capital based organizations are no longer needed. So everything that we do now such as how we educate, provide healthcare, provide services will be radically transformed.
Our large institutions can no longer do anything properly. The military is no exception. It is too big, too slow, too ponderous, too expensive. It cannot deal with war as it is waged today. The military are themselves full of resistance to the kind of change that social software implies.
BUT, people in the military who are losing the war of public opinion - who know now that Human Terrain is the new battlefield - are weighing the idea of loss of control with losing the war. My bet is that they will seek to win the war. This is what Gates is starting to say.
The greatest irony is that their enemy is showing them how to do this. Here is a CNN report on why NATO is now getting behind a Social Software approach to war. (Posted yesterday- sorry about the repeat but this makes sense)
CNN interviews a NATO Official in Afghanistan who echoes the Secretary and insists that we better get good at this or risk losing the real war - which is all political.
The strategy aims to counter years of propaganda video posted on the Internet showing Taliban attacks on NATO forces which fighters use to claim that NATO’s position in the Afghan war is deteriorating.
“The Taliban, who are literally cave-dwellers, are doing better than we are on a key battleground — and that’s video,” said NATO spokesman James Appathurai. “They deploy with videographers. We don’t. They have DVDs out in an hour, we don’t.”
Wielding video cameras like weapons, fighters quickly upload images of their attacks and create a valuable morale booster for their supporters.
Now, after much internal debate, NATO has begun declassifying and posting top secret combat video on YouTube and other Web platforms to try and beat the Taliban at its own game.
“We’re, in a sense, winning the tactical battles, but we’re not focusing enough on the strategic battle, which is public opinion,” said Appathurai.
The link to the excellent report and video is here.
In 1918, America could see for itself the power of flight. The nation adopted it like no other.
So here is my prediction. The first institution that will really invest in developing Social Software to radically improve how it delivers will be parts of the military. As with the train in the civil war and WWI, as with flight in WWI and WWII, how we deploy, how we fight and what victory is will be redefined.
The greatest irony will be is that the lesson for this change will have been taught by Al Qaeda.
This will not be an all or nothing adoption. Even in the 1920. and 1930’s Billy Mitchell fought an uphill battle with his superiors about the value of aviation. But the wedge was in.
The first flight was in 1903. By 1945, aviation was the new dominant military power. By 1975 aviation had captured the civilian world.
I think that history will look back at Facebook and smile.
Well done Mark - but look at what this technology really did!
by Rob Paterson
November 28, 2007 at 4:43 pm · Filed under
Al Qaeda, CNN, Conflict, Enterprise 2.0, Nato, Secretary Gates, Taliban, War
Secretary Gates made this statement in a recent speech:
It is just plain embarrassing that al-Qaeda is better at communicating its message on the internet than America. As one foreign diplomat asked a couple of years ago, “How has one man in a cave managed to out-communicate the world’s greatest communication society?” Speed, agility, and cultural relevance are not terms that come readily to mind when discussing U.S. strategic communications.
Only days later, CNN interviews a NATO Official in Afghanistan who echoes the Secretary and insists that we better get good at this or risk losing the real war - which is all political.
The strategy aims to counter years of propaganda video posted on the Internet showing Taliban attacks on NATO forces which fighters use to claim that NATO’s position in the Afghan war is deteriorating.
“The Taliban, who are literally cave-dwellers, are doing better than we are on a key battleground — and that’s video,” said NATO spokesman James Appathurai. “They deploy with videographers. We don’t. They have DVDs out in an hour, we don’t.”
Wielding video cameras like weapons, fighters quickly upload images of their attacks and create a valuable morale booster for their supporters.
Now, after much internal debate, NATO has begun declassifying and posting top secret combat video on YouTube and other Web platforms to try and beat the Taliban at its own game.
“We’re, in a sense, winning the tactical battles, but we’re not focusing enough on the strategic battle, which is public opinion,” said Appathurai.
The link to the excellent report and video is here.
NATO made several video excerpts available to CNN. One excerpt shows an armed Taliban fighter disguised as a woman in a full burqa, taking refuge with women and children to avoid being targeted by NATO.
One disturbing NATO video begins with a birds-eye view of a home in southern Afghanistan where NATO said a high-level Taliban meeting was taking place. Before NATO helicopters took aim at the house, a small boy is posted at the door as a human shield, forcing the NATO chopper pilot to hold fire.
Information is a crucial tool in any war, but is especially important in Afghanistan where the Taliban’s deeds, words and images have portrayed a deteriorating security landscape, with NATO soldiers on the run.
NATO officials argue that this is far from the truth and the country has experienced significant development and growth with constant attention being paid to security problems.
Appathurai said there are hundreds of military combat videos that show the true extent of Taliban engagement and the brutality of their tactics.
He admitted that in the past he had a hard time convincing NATO allies to declassify this sensitive, secret video for wide release. He said on occasion, that will now change.
NATO said the Taliban videos slowly erode the world’s perception of how the Afghanistan mission is progressing. But the Taliban’s media savvy means much more, said one expert.
Videos such as those produced by the Taliban are the lifeblood of terrorist recruiting campaigns, said Glen Jenvey, a UK-based Internet specialist who tracks trends in extremist and jihad content on the Web.
“At one point somebody has actually brainwashed these people to become terrorists, and this is where the recruiting sergeants actually take hold and the online part is an important part of it,” Jenvey said.
This reminds of the the history of the airplane. The first flight was only a few years before WWI. War propelled the technology. With no war, imagine all the people who would have dismissed it. I am getting a feeling that war will propell social media the same way. Real needs to know and to understand and to inform will drive the resources. Business will I think follow.
by Rob Paterson
October 23, 2007 at 3:38 pm · Filed under
Enterprise 2.0, Michael Yon, Public Media, SaaS, Social Media, SocialText, War, Web 2.0, Wisdom of Crowds, barriers
Thanks to a reader - Rob Lantz - I have discovered the Ernie Pyle of our time.
His name is Michael Yon. Michael works for no paper and lives off donations. He is writing the most compelling material of the conflict in Iraq.
Here is a taste - gripping and so human - so different from CNN
Off course the official Army hates him - but as you can see by this article - the guys love him. He is a real warrior, was in the Special Forces, who can pick up a weapon when it all goes wrong as it does in this story.
What’s really like on the ground for both US Troops - now moved out of the Green Zone and into the community - and for the Iraqis who live there - what do both really need from each other? Here Yon shows us a view not seen before by “Real” journalists who read the press releases in the Green Zone.
Without a paper behind him - he can tell the truth. The more we can publicize his work the more the truth can be told - a glimpse of the “Paper” of the future?
by Rob Paterson
October 5, 2007 at 1:31 pm · Filed under
Conflict, David Kilkullen, Enterprise 2.0, Messy World, Public Media, Relationships, Social Media, War
David Kilcullen, an Australian who has been advising General Petraeus is I think one the most perceptive of all those who are thinking about how war itself is conducted now in a social context.
Here is a central idea that he offers - that war now is all about story. The winner has the story that most of the people adopt.
War is increasingly about stories - the social web is how they are told. So the web itself will become key to how wars are fought.
If a big powerful state beats up a weak one - the story causes the host population to lose confidence and in the end, influence the politics to withdraw. The smart opponent knows how to set up the story. After all why the choice of the World Trade Centre? We responded as they expected becuase it was a symbolic attack on our story. Our predictable over-reaction makes us look like bullies and so again - we lose the story as the set up ensured.
How then to respond. I think that Kilkullen’s slide gives us a plotline to follow.
We have to create a compelling narrative that is based on the truth.
I think that all of this also applies to all forms of enterprise. Spin and traditional marketing fails the Story test.
The Wright Company in particular and American airplane companies in general continue to lose their technological edge to the Europeans. This is due in part to the U.S. Government’s failure to support the fledgling airplane industry. While the governments of England, France, and Germany are buying hundreds of airplanes for their armed forces and supporting aviation research, the United States is spending roughly the same amount of money as Bulgaria. (First to Fly)
