Posted on Dec 27, 2014
ARCOM for calling out inappropriate use in Social Media. Appropriate or not?
96.8K
1.24K
299
24
24
0
Posted in these groups: 
Awards
Social Media
Awards Social Media
Posted >1 y ago
Responses: 169
69
69
0
She does not deserve an ARCOM. She does not deserve an AAM or any medal. At MOST she deserves a certificate because she was just trying to do her job as a NCO. Her statement “I looked them up, introduced myself and explained to them why they were stupid." falls short of the professionalism I expect of a senior NCO. Since the NCO Creed starts with "No one is more professional than I", I believe there is a learning opportunity in this for the 1SG and also an opportunity for her to share her experiences.
Since she was so quick to let the director of the Army SHARP program know about these service members transgressions, she must have some knowledge and interest in the program. I would have her appointed as a SHARP representative for the Brigade, Battalion and Company, and I would have her prepare a presentation on 'Monitoring Social Media of your Service Members'. After her Battalion and Brigade Command Sergeants Major were satisfied with the presentation, I'd make sure she had the opportunity to present it to every unit in the Division as part of the Divisions SHARP training program, as long as it did not interfere or take away from her assigned duties.
Her move to turn them into the director of the Army SHARP program rather than an immediate supervisor or someone in their chain to deal with the problem tells me she was either to lazy to find out about their immediate supervisor or chain of command or was looking for recognition she ended up with.
The Soldier's who attacked her and who were wearing uniforms in their profile photos are evidently not only not professional but also not the sharpest tools in the shed. It would probably behoove a serving member of the armed forces to not 'put themselves out there' by using a profile picture in uniform.
Since she was so quick to let the director of the Army SHARP program know about these service members transgressions, she must have some knowledge and interest in the program. I would have her appointed as a SHARP representative for the Brigade, Battalion and Company, and I would have her prepare a presentation on 'Monitoring Social Media of your Service Members'. After her Battalion and Brigade Command Sergeants Major were satisfied with the presentation, I'd make sure she had the opportunity to present it to every unit in the Division as part of the Divisions SHARP training program, as long as it did not interfere or take away from her assigned duties.
Her move to turn them into the director of the Army SHARP program rather than an immediate supervisor or someone in their chain to deal with the problem tells me she was either to lazy to find out about their immediate supervisor or chain of command or was looking for recognition she ended up with.
The Soldier's who attacked her and who were wearing uniforms in their profile photos are evidently not only not professional but also not the sharpest tools in the shed. It would probably behoove a serving member of the armed forces to not 'put themselves out there' by using a profile picture in uniform.
(69)
(0)
SGT (Join to see)
CWO2 Shannon Reck, tracking, Sir. I saw the "asshat" comments. She could have handled it differently. I think, by the comments she posted, she opened herself up for a lot of backlash that could have potentially been avoided. As positive as her intentions were, she fell into a troll trap.
As you mentioned, though, there are some variables we're missing...like the entire website involved, and the video. Personally, I would have liked that to have been thrown into the article, so that we can read it all. Maybe it would shed some light on what started the issue and how we can handle the social media problem.
And, agreed, Sir. Medals have lost their value. I'm not too convinced that an ARCOM here was entirely deserved. Hopefully, we'll have some more info come up with this.
As you mentioned, though, there are some variables we're missing...like the entire website involved, and the video. Personally, I would have liked that to have been thrown into the article, so that we can read it all. Maybe it would shed some light on what started the issue and how we can handle the social media problem.
And, agreed, Sir. Medals have lost their value. I'm not too convinced that an ARCOM here was entirely deserved. Hopefully, we'll have some more info come up with this.
(4)
(0)
MAJ Sitz Randy
The awards system has been flawed for many years. Some commands hand them out for everything and some only rarely. This command group...well I don't know what they are thinking? I think she needs some counseling on how to correct soldiers professionally...certainly not a medal.
(0)
(0)
30
30
0
Ladies and gentlemen, this is a politically driven award. The Soldiers and former Soldiers that besieged her with aggressive unprofessional typed comments should have been put in check, but not by the HQDA Director of SHARP. That was a spiteful "oh yeah, I will make sure you get hemmed up move". She went about her correction wrong. You should always handle situations on the lowest level. Her comments in reference to the situation are unprofessional and demonstrate a serious lack of real leadership. As SNCO's we are supposed to correct deficiencies not take a personal vested interest in destroying Soldiers. By going to the highest level, she spotlighted and put on blast the entire organization for which these Soldiers belong, all without allowing the leadership an opportunity to fix the situation. In my professional opinion this SNCO wasn't deserving of an ARCOM, a COA, or a Coin. If anything, I believe she should have been counseled for not upholding the creed in reference to "Officers of my unit will have maximum time to accomplish their duties, they will not have to accomplish mine." She "CC'ed" the HQDA SHARP Director and therefore elevated this situation to a level that was unnecessary and involved a whole lot of Officers that had better things to do then to police up some unprofessional Soldiers on the internet. Our duty as NCO's is to enforce good order and discipline for Commanders, not run to them for recognition or for them to enforce the regulations for which we are supposed enforce.
Granted this is all based off of my "Monday Morning Quarterback" assessment of what has been written. There might be more to the story or it maybe distorted in the conveyance of these articles, but I stand by my assessment based on what I can see.
Finally, we all have a duty and obligation to teach, coach, and mentor our next generation and it is getting increasingly more difficult with Social Media and other forms of technology. Never pass up an opportunity to make a correction, create a professional learning point, and reinforce good order and discipline. AND FOR THE LOVE OF GOD....STOP THE POLITICALLY MOTIVATED STYLE OF LEADING! "BACKBONE!!"
Granted this is all based off of my "Monday Morning Quarterback" assessment of what has been written. There might be more to the story or it maybe distorted in the conveyance of these articles, but I stand by my assessment based on what I can see.
Finally, we all have a duty and obligation to teach, coach, and mentor our next generation and it is getting increasingly more difficult with Social Media and other forms of technology. Never pass up an opportunity to make a correction, create a professional learning point, and reinforce good order and discipline. AND FOR THE LOVE OF GOD....STOP THE POLITICALLY MOTIVATED STYLE OF LEADING! "BACKBONE!!"
(30)
(0)
1SG (Join to see)
SFC (Join to see), on target, X-ring. I don't want to be too cynical, because I am not in her head, but it does look suspiciously like she went fishing for recognition.
(5)
(0)
SFC (Join to see)
SSG Jose Garza....There I upped you twice.......should counter that one. Just know I don't "Troll" I am merely adding information that was out there on the original post. I have said my 2 cents on this subject. I still stand by what I posted.
(2)
(0)
SSG (Join to see)
SFC (Join to see), well thank you for that. I wondered when I would ever get one. My question was in addition to your comment, and I stand by my comments as well!
(2)
(0)
25
25
0
Joe's should be able to have their options, but Joe needs to fix his privacy settings.hahaha
(25)
(0)
CSM (Join to see)
SSG Mirko Maravi, I'm sure it was an oversight and honest mistake and you meant to type/address Captain Ann Wolfer by her full name, not just her first name. I've never known a good Airborne NCO to knowingly do something like that, and you impress me as a good Airborne NCO. Will you help me out here and prove the professionalism of the NCO Corps is something we take seriously?
(3)
(0)
SFC (Join to see)
Wrong answer all the way around battle. It's all funny until something happens.
SFC Mark Bailey in response to what you said
"If that is the criteria then the person is technically in uniform 24/7 and therefore unable to EVER express an opinion." that is exactly the point. our SHARP and EO policies apply 24/7. On and off duty. On and off installation. THAT is the point WE need to get through to our Soldiers. The point is that we want to change the climate that our young Soldiers come up in. If we stop the foolishness now, don't you think it'll make them more upstanding citizens to know that they are not violating/disrespecting someone??
SFC Mark Bailey in response to what you said
"If that is the criteria then the person is technically in uniform 24/7 and therefore unable to EVER express an opinion." that is exactly the point. our SHARP and EO policies apply 24/7. On and off duty. On and off installation. THAT is the point WE need to get through to our Soldiers. The point is that we want to change the climate that our young Soldiers come up in. If we stop the foolishness now, don't you think it'll make them more upstanding citizens to know that they are not violating/disrespecting someone??
(0)
(0)
CPO (Join to see)
People are not programs, we all are individuals, the military is no exception to understanding the more we as leaders know and are involved with our people, meaning actually doing the leadership function, then we can much better provide for the success of their experience. The goal of a leader is to facilitate the process not the people. People need support, a person to act as a buffer so they have room to learn, grow, make mistakes and build their future with sound decision making capabilities. I would buy into the 24/7 stuff except back stateside, they just don't quite see it that way. Your benefits are being stripped away, even the ability to use many of the stateside military hospitals in the event of an emergency. Now go to a civilian hospital and you have to have permission first or they do not have to pay. You see, process improvement is about the processes for people to use, not to use the people to have them operate at peak performance 24 / 7. People just happen to be human and younger kids, even the real smart or well educated younger kids are still kids. Time the people in the military members learned and those that have been around need to mentor so that younger military members learn how to work "with" people. Congress is cutting our benefits, the Vets are trying to fight to keep them for you, me and all of us. That is what we do as a loyal Vet. We never forget where we came from and we have the ability to stand up for those who may not know how or are afraid to speak. That is the criteria, not leading by some little pin or scout badge but by knowledge, trust and willingness of those who will follow. We as a people can not keep treating people like a circuit board, burn it out and replace. The replacements are not coming and the ones that are there are not trained and mentored in the first place. Time to know the people again, that seems to have gotten lost someplace. The active duty, veterans and service groups all have a role, acting like a kid and a tattle tale, try and find trust when it is needed later to get a job done. ;) As a leader you are not there to "Make these people" into anything. It is your job to help them become professional and have the supplies and opportunities to learn, advance and grow. What they do with that opportunity is up to them. Including the one that showed her true colors as a leader by screwing the very people they are there to coach, mentor and work with peers to create a climate "Better" not perfect than before. Not a hard concept. Finally, I do not do the "don't you" and should't you and you must agree.... I don't have to do anything. Speak for myself, not have the false sense that I have power to make anybody into anything. Finally always stand up to my core values.... If you can not do the job, get help and if you can not get help, step aside and let another deal with the issue. That does not include taking this to flag level. Sweet lord, what is wrong with this soldier and that to me is the foolishness we need to stop also. Foolishness is part of being a kid, I personally hope that the child inside never dies and keeps me and my ability to dream and trust alive, watching as dreams come true for myself and those around me forever. Just an opinion looking at this from outside and a great deal of leadership experience.
(1)
(0)
20
20
0
An ARCOM for any soldier should mean that they went "Above & Beyond" the expected actions scope and requirements of a soldier 1-2 pay grades above their current one.
My first ARCOM was earned by doing more than looking at the internet and sending PM's or leaving posts on other peoples Facebook pages.
My recommendation?
She did her job digitally
Award her a Digital Award that can be added to her Facebook page
My first ARCOM was earned by doing more than looking at the internet and sending PM's or leaving posts on other peoples Facebook pages.
My recommendation?
She did her job digitally
Award her a Digital Award that can be added to her Facebook page
(20)
(0)
14
14
0
I can say this, because I have called out stupidity myself. NO. Congratulations for being an NCO and pointing out that some have exceeded the limits of good taste, morale and discipline. She is deserving of a pat on the back and the knowledge that she has done the right thing, which is to step up upon seeing something wrong.
The reason that this got brought out, is because she also fired off notes up channel regarding a program, which generated a Command response.
my .02
The reason that this got brought out, is because she also fired off notes up channel regarding a program, which generated a Command response.
my .02
(14)
(0)
CPO (Join to see)
Sad part is, she is being held up as a sign of maturity....... Strange times we live in these days.
(1)
(0)
11
11
0
Correcting idiots goes with the territory. Too many would click away and punt on doing what she did.
However, in my humble opinion, the press release indicates to me that she was given an ARCOM because the Army wanted to celebrate a leader who was aggressively supporting their SHARP policy. It is propaganda. She did a good job. But an ARCOM? Please.
However, in my humble opinion, the press release indicates to me that she was given an ARCOM because the Army wanted to celebrate a leader who was aggressively supporting their SHARP policy. It is propaganda. She did a good job. But an ARCOM? Please.
(11)
(0)
11
11
0
Sorry.. I find the whole thing ridiculous. Her statement, to me, showed no maturity whatsoever. She told them why they were stupid (as opposed to explaining good order and discipline and the importance of image while in uniform) or telling SHARP where they were lacking (as opposed to any other option because that had nothing to do with SHARP)
As my British friends would say, "Poor form, ole man" (woman)).
I will say that it's a new day with social media but if the troops were acting up downtown, what would have been the proper response and would it have been award worthy. Sometimes we take this crap too far.
What do current members think about it???
As my British friends would say, "Poor form, ole man" (woman)).
I will say that it's a new day with social media but if the troops were acting up downtown, what would have been the proper response and would it have been award worthy. Sometimes we take this crap too far.
What do current members think about it???
(11)
(0)
CPT (Join to see)
i wonder if this was to bring attention and to encourage others to act against such activity.
(3)
(0)
Suspended Profile
SFC (Join to see). OMG!!! I am the last person to get wound up by the award of a medal intended to reward heroic conduct at the risk of one's life. Did SECDEF Hagel or LTGEN McConville even bother to review the criteria for the Army Commendation Medal ??? What the blazes does the citation for this medal say???
The next thing you know we will be awarding Bronze Stars to people who never even visited a combat zone.
Warmest Regards, Sandy
Army Regulation 600–8–22 . . . 3–18. Army Commendation Medal . . .
a. The ARCOM was established by War Department Circular 377, 18 December 1945 (amended in DA General Orders 10, 31 March 1960).
b. The ARCOM is awarded to any member of the Armed Forces of the United States who, while serving in any capacity with the Army after 6 December 1941, distinguishes himself or herself by heroism, meritorious achievement or meritorious service. Award may be made to a member of the Armed Forces of a friendly foreign nation who, after 1 June 1962, distinguishes himself or herself by an act of heroism, extraordinary achievement, or meritorious service which has been of mutual benefit to a friendly nation and the United States.
c. Awards of the ARCOM may be made for acts of valor performed under circumstances described above which are of lesser degree than required for award of the Bronze Star Medal. These acts may involve aerial flight.
d. The ARCOM may be awarded for acts of noncombatant-related heroism which does not meet the requirements for an award of the Soldier’s Medal.
The next thing you know we will be awarding Bronze Stars to people who never even visited a combat zone.
Warmest Regards, Sandy
Army Regulation 600–8–22 . . . 3–18. Army Commendation Medal . . .
a. The ARCOM was established by War Department Circular 377, 18 December 1945 (amended in DA General Orders 10, 31 March 1960).
b. The ARCOM is awarded to any member of the Armed Forces of the United States who, while serving in any capacity with the Army after 6 December 1941, distinguishes himself or herself by heroism, meritorious achievement or meritorious service. Award may be made to a member of the Armed Forces of a friendly foreign nation who, after 1 June 1962, distinguishes himself or herself by an act of heroism, extraordinary achievement, or meritorious service which has been of mutual benefit to a friendly nation and the United States.
c. Awards of the ARCOM may be made for acts of valor performed under circumstances described above which are of lesser degree than required for award of the Bronze Star Medal. These acts may involve aerial flight.
d. The ARCOM may be awarded for acts of noncombatant-related heroism which does not meet the requirements for an award of the Soldier’s Medal.
CPT Jack Durish
I'm not certain that I follow your objections. Please clarify...
You found the regulation that specifies that the ARCOM may be awarded for heroism OR meritorious service or achievement, then complain "I am the last person to get wound up by the award of a medal intended to reward heroic conduct at the risk of one's life." Did you miss the part about "...meritorious service or achievement..."?
Secondly, why are you discussing the Bronze Star Medal?
Again, please be patient with me. I'm an old man now and sometimes these twists in logic can escape me.
Thank you
You found the regulation that specifies that the ARCOM may be awarded for heroism OR meritorious service or achievement, then complain "I am the last person to get wound up by the award of a medal intended to reward heroic conduct at the risk of one's life." Did you miss the part about "...meritorious service or achievement..."?
Secondly, why are you discussing the Bronze Star Medal?
Again, please be patient with me. I'm an old man now and sometimes these twists in logic can escape me.
Thank you
(0)
(0)
Suspended Profile
CPT Jack Durish. I think to a certain extent there was offline communication about this subject . . . where it seemed the ARCOM and BSM were being awarded at one time to our combat troops for heroism in combat or at least conduct putting their lives at exceptional risk . . . then for a period of time the ARCOM and BSM were most often handed out like candy to too many senior officers . . . so much so that many colleagues suggested a BSM without a V device was basically meaningless . . . but the situation got so far out of hand that Congress voted to restrict the BSM with or without V device to actions while in combat and/or receiving combat pay . . . thereby excluding many of the most egregious awards to senior officers. I personally never cared to wear any award or decoration beyond branch and rank . . . but I know many who earned an ARCOM / BSM the hard way . . . and I just don't see giving any award for a few minutes of surfing the web, complaining some postings were inappropriate, and jumping Chain of Command so far as to get the HQ SHARP Officer and SECDEF involved. Maybe we should create a new set of awards for social networking activity . . . but given the traditional ARCOM/BSM criteria . . . I think the ARCOM / BSM should be reserved for those individuals taking physical risks. Warmest Regards, Sandy
CPT Jack Durish
I was a party to that conversation and can only repeat what I said there (and in other places). I was Chief of Awards and Decorations for a time in Vietnam with the 9th Infantry Division. Every recommendation was read before a panel of officers who voted on them. There were no "automatic" awards and decorations other than the Purple Heart and the Combat Infantryman's Badge which were awarded in strict compliance with standards established in Army regulations. Yes, I heard of abuses in other units in Vietnam and I also heard of them being forced to rescind all awards and re-award only those in compliance. That was then and this is now...
The BSM and ARCOM with "V" device are much more meaningful than those without. That is why the "V" device exists, to distinguish awards for valor from those for meritorious service and achievement.
As I mentioned in my own response to this dialog thread below, every award comes with a citation. I'm proud of mine and I'm proud to explain to my children and grandchildren when they asked me what I did to earn them. I can only wonder if the 1SG in this case will be equally proud.
The BSM and ARCOM with "V" device are much more meaningful than those without. That is why the "V" device exists, to distinguish awards for valor from those for meritorious service and achievement.
As I mentioned in my own response to this dialog thread below, every award comes with a citation. I'm proud of mine and I'm proud to explain to my children and grandchildren when they asked me what I did to earn them. I can only wonder if the 1SG in this case will be equally proud.
(1)
(0)
Suspended Profile
CPT Jack Durish. Thank you for making your ebook Vietnam--A Soldier's Journal available.
Warmest Regards, Sandy
o http://www.smashwords.com/books/view/248158
o https://www.linkedin.com/profile/view?id=3061537
o http://www.jackdurish.com/
Warmest Regards, Sandy
o http://www.smashwords.com/books/view/248158
o https://www.linkedin.com/profile/view?id=3061537
o http://www.jackdurish.com/
Smashwords – Vietnam: A Soldier's Journal – a book by Jack Durish
Vietnam: A Soldier's Journal by Jack Durish is a personal memoir of the author's tour of duty in Vietnam during the war that tore America's heart in half. It is a tale of his adventures and misadventures while serving in the rear echelons of the 9th Infantry Division. This telling of the Vietnam story is not politically correct, just true.
10
10
0
this is a slippery slope here. Award worthy, no, her job, yes. It's a weird realm that we are entering. On one hand we need our Soldiers to remain professionals at all times but are we invading their privacy by cyber stalking them? There is a fine line we as leaders are walking by trolling a Soldiers page and it is only a matter of time that someone goes to far. If a 1SG has enough time to be trolling then they aren't doing their job to the fullest. Police these kids up in your spare time but becareful not to go to far. As for the original question, I am shocked that the COL signed this award. At the root of this issue is simply an NCO doing her job. This situation deserved a coin and a handshake, but not the blatant abuse of awards and decorations.
(10)
(0)
LTC David Strong
A slippery slope no doubt! As I can see, it's a very good time to be retired and not having to deal with issues of the Internet and the possibility of not being PC. As for the COL, who knows it might have been driven by levels above him and he might just not wanted to fight a battle that wasn't winnable. As for the discussion of giving her a coin, my first thought was maybe doing her job was worthy of a coin from the first officer in her chain, maybe her CO could have given her a quarter. And based, at least on one of her responses, maybe she is also deserving of some re-training. As I mentioned, it's a very good day to be retired.
(2)
(0)
SFC (Join to see)
LTC David Strong, I have to agree. Incidents like this makes me consider retiring sooner rather than later. The story doesn’t give enough detail to have a truly informed opinion. Though, if she found a video offensive, she didn’t have to click it. The calendars and posters we had in our infantry barracks back in the 80’s would have had us in deep water today. EVERYTHING is offensive. I’ve surprised there’s anyone left in the Army tough enough to kill the enemy.
(1)
(0)
9
9
0
That could have been a bullet comment on her NCOER. Soldiers deploy and stand guard, patrol, security convoys and come back with an ARCOM after a years deployment.
If you are a combat arms guy this stinks, but in MI i guess this is big... In no way am i bashing the 1SG for her actions, but an ARCOM????
If you are a combat arms guy this stinks, but in MI i guess this is big... In no way am i bashing the 1SG for her actions, but an ARCOM????
(9)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google 
