3 ms·
Your arguments are cogent, but it's still 'state-affiliated media' - I mean, that also applies to the whole 'media embedding program' that got started in Desert
by photochemsyn 4y ago
Your arguments are cogent, but it's still 'state-affiliated media' - I mean, that also applies to the whole 'media embedding program' that got started in Desert Storm (Gulf War I, or perhaps II if we count the Iraq-Iran war in the 1980s).
Independent media is not necessarily adversarial to government, but it can't be dependent on government or it turns into nothing but the propaganda arm of the government. E.g. reporting on military failures is necessary, even if this upsets the brass because it damages morale.
- warner25 4y agoI think the embedded media program is much more problematic than TWI. Embedded media is at the invitation and discretion of operational public affairs officers and commanders, and those public affairs officers and commanders absolutely have operational "themes" and "messages" that they want to have broadcasted. I just finished Michael Hastings' book The Operators and he describes in-depth the dilemma for a reporter. But TWI is run by human resources wonks, and mostly for the benefit of the individuals participating. Frankly, it's disparaged by a lot of operational commanders who think those individuals should be serving in the mud somewhere instead of padding their personal resumes. I will concede, however, that there is a certain level of coziness between the Army and the companies that take TWI participants. In the IT community, for example, the Army buys a lot of stuff from Microsoft and Cisco, and Microsoft and Cisco host TWI participants. It makes sense in terms of the Army and those companies wanting to learn more about each other.