32
32
0
Even though the advent of social media dates back to at least 1997, the U.S. Department of Defense (DOD) never had an agency-wide policy governing its use by military and civilian personnel. That is, until now.
In “Official Use of Social Media for Public Affairs Purposes” (DOD Instruction 5400.17), the Pentagon on Aug. 12 published formal policies and procedures on how best to use social media properties such as Facebook (established in 2004), Twitter (2006), Instagram (2010) and other “official” accounts on social media platforms. An aim of the 27-page policy is to maintain high ethical and professional standards in DOD’s communications with the public.
“It’s long overdue,” conceded Andy Oare, director of digital media for the Office of the Secretary of Defense (OSD), in a DOD News blog post published Aug. 15. “There have been efforts in the past to do this, but in an organization of this size and magnitude, you need to fully coordinate and ensure all viewpoints are heard and represented. We wanted to make sure the services were collaborators from the very beginning.”
Previous DOD social media policies had more narrowly addressed how DOD personnel could safely use social media. And some service branches and DOD components maintained separate social media guidance.
But DOD’s Oare said this is the first policy to cover how — and how not — to use such channels in public affairs.
“Social media has an effect on every one of our service members, civilians, contractors and their families — whether they run an official account or have never heard of Twitter,” Oare told DOD News. “We owe it to all of them to have one central policy that provides a clearly articulated standard of operation and accountability.”
Although the new policy could take precedence over established social media policies, Oare said DOD commands and components aren’t prohibited from producing additional, specific guidance on social media usage.
“We deliberately wrote it in a collaborative manner, and it encourages component heads to continue establishing component-specific social media regulations,” Oare said. “Our aim is not to be prescriptive or restrictive, but rather to lay out some commonsense rules that simply have not been formally articulated at this level.”
Recruitment marketing via social media not covered
An exception is made for social media channels used for marketing purposes — these types of accounts remain governed by a separate policy: DOD Instruction 1304.35, titled “Military Marketing.” This no doubt was a relief to military recruiters relying on social media amid “the most challenging recruiting environment since the All-Volunteer Force was established in 1973,” as a recent Army memo put it. The military marketing instruction allows recruiters to engage in “an aggressive program of advertising and market research that targets prospective recruits and individuals influencing prospective recruits.”
The new DOD-wide instruction also allows public affairs’ social media accounts to amplify military recruitment posts.
Military and civilian personnel engaged in other DOD public affairs communications on social media must follow the new instruction. This includes members of OSD, military departments, offices of the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and the Joint Staff, Combatant Commands, DOD Office of Inspector General, defense agencies, DOD field activities, and all other DOD organizations and entities. The instruction spells out who is responsible for enforcing the new rules.
Private use of social media among areas covered
The instruction covers the following three key areas:
Core principles of social media use within DOD. Among other guidance, this section states that DOD uses social media to be transparent with and disseminate information to the public, and that mishandling social media sites harms the government’s reputation and relationships, in the United States and abroad. The rules make clear that DOD personnel can have personal, nonofficial accounts but can’t use them to imply that private content is DOD-sanctioned or endorsed. Disclaimers should be used to reduce confusion or doubt, the instruction says.
Procedures on managing social media account records. This area spells out how to retain, dispose of, manage, and transition social media content and/or accounts; how to handle features such as direct messaging; and how to deal with cyber vandalism and imposter accounts.
Guidance on DOD personnel’s use of personal social media accounts. Among other areas, this section covers rules against distributing nonpublic information through personal accounts; how to make sure personal accounts are clearly marked (a sample disclaimer is provided); and when it’s OK to forward, like, and link to official DOD information from personal accounts.
The instruction adds: “A personal social media account must not be an avenue for friends, followers, or private contacts to gain access to DOD programs or seek action from DOD officials in a manner not available to the general public.” The rules also prohibit DOD personnel from using their official position for private financial gain or commercial endorsements.
DOD plans to review and update the guidance to make sure it’s current and relevant, the DOD News post said.
Learn more
• Read the full DOD Instruction 5400.17: https://rly.pt/3Rjf1uS
• Read “DOD Releases First Departmentwide Social Media Policy,” DOD News, Aug. 15, 2022: https://rly.pt/3TwGTOe
In “Official Use of Social Media for Public Affairs Purposes” (DOD Instruction 5400.17), the Pentagon on Aug. 12 published formal policies and procedures on how best to use social media properties such as Facebook (established in 2004), Twitter (2006), Instagram (2010) and other “official” accounts on social media platforms. An aim of the 27-page policy is to maintain high ethical and professional standards in DOD’s communications with the public.
“It’s long overdue,” conceded Andy Oare, director of digital media for the Office of the Secretary of Defense (OSD), in a DOD News blog post published Aug. 15. “There have been efforts in the past to do this, but in an organization of this size and magnitude, you need to fully coordinate and ensure all viewpoints are heard and represented. We wanted to make sure the services were collaborators from the very beginning.”
Previous DOD social media policies had more narrowly addressed how DOD personnel could safely use social media. And some service branches and DOD components maintained separate social media guidance.
But DOD’s Oare said this is the first policy to cover how — and how not — to use such channels in public affairs.
“Social media has an effect on every one of our service members, civilians, contractors and their families — whether they run an official account or have never heard of Twitter,” Oare told DOD News. “We owe it to all of them to have one central policy that provides a clearly articulated standard of operation and accountability.”
Although the new policy could take precedence over established social media policies, Oare said DOD commands and components aren’t prohibited from producing additional, specific guidance on social media usage.
“We deliberately wrote it in a collaborative manner, and it encourages component heads to continue establishing component-specific social media regulations,” Oare said. “Our aim is not to be prescriptive or restrictive, but rather to lay out some commonsense rules that simply have not been formally articulated at this level.”
Recruitment marketing via social media not covered
An exception is made for social media channels used for marketing purposes — these types of accounts remain governed by a separate policy: DOD Instruction 1304.35, titled “Military Marketing.” This no doubt was a relief to military recruiters relying on social media amid “the most challenging recruiting environment since the All-Volunteer Force was established in 1973,” as a recent Army memo put it. The military marketing instruction allows recruiters to engage in “an aggressive program of advertising and market research that targets prospective recruits and individuals influencing prospective recruits.”
The new DOD-wide instruction also allows public affairs’ social media accounts to amplify military recruitment posts.
Military and civilian personnel engaged in other DOD public affairs communications on social media must follow the new instruction. This includes members of OSD, military departments, offices of the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and the Joint Staff, Combatant Commands, DOD Office of Inspector General, defense agencies, DOD field activities, and all other DOD organizations and entities. The instruction spells out who is responsible for enforcing the new rules.
Private use of social media among areas covered
The instruction covers the following three key areas:
Core principles of social media use within DOD. Among other guidance, this section states that DOD uses social media to be transparent with and disseminate information to the public, and that mishandling social media sites harms the government’s reputation and relationships, in the United States and abroad. The rules make clear that DOD personnel can have personal, nonofficial accounts but can’t use them to imply that private content is DOD-sanctioned or endorsed. Disclaimers should be used to reduce confusion or doubt, the instruction says.
Procedures on managing social media account records. This area spells out how to retain, dispose of, manage, and transition social media content and/or accounts; how to handle features such as direct messaging; and how to deal with cyber vandalism and imposter accounts.
Guidance on DOD personnel’s use of personal social media accounts. Among other areas, this section covers rules against distributing nonpublic information through personal accounts; how to make sure personal accounts are clearly marked (a sample disclaimer is provided); and when it’s OK to forward, like, and link to official DOD information from personal accounts.
The instruction adds: “A personal social media account must not be an avenue for friends, followers, or private contacts to gain access to DOD programs or seek action from DOD officials in a manner not available to the general public.” The rules also prohibit DOD personnel from using their official position for private financial gain or commercial endorsements.
DOD plans to review and update the guidance to make sure it’s current and relevant, the DOD News post said.
Learn more
• Read the full DOD Instruction 5400.17: https://rly.pt/3Rjf1uS
• Read “DOD Releases First Departmentwide Social Media Policy,” DOD News, Aug. 15, 2022: https://rly.pt/3TwGTOe
Edited >1 y ago
Posted >1 y ago
Responses: 11
*chuckle*
a. Maintain a Clear Distinction Between Personal and Official Accounts.
(1) DoD personnel must ensure that all personal social media accounts are clearly identifiable as personal accounts. DoD personnel must ensure that their personal social media accounts avoid use of DoD titles, insignia, uniforms, or symbols in a way that could imply DoD sanction or endorsement of the content. DoD personnel should use personal, non-official contact information, such as personal telephone numbers or postal and e-mail addresses, to establish personal, nonofficial accounts.
Umm ... yeah. I think that's going to be a big problem on this site unless there are big changes (... avoid use of DoD titles, insignia, uniforms ...). Not so much for the Vets, but the active duty accounts would need to change in order to comply with the new policy.
a. Maintain a Clear Distinction Between Personal and Official Accounts.
(1) DoD personnel must ensure that all personal social media accounts are clearly identifiable as personal accounts. DoD personnel must ensure that their personal social media accounts avoid use of DoD titles, insignia, uniforms, or symbols in a way that could imply DoD sanction or endorsement of the content. DoD personnel should use personal, non-official contact information, such as personal telephone numbers or postal and e-mail addresses, to establish personal, nonofficial accounts.
Umm ... yeah. I think that's going to be a big problem on this site unless there are big changes (... avoid use of DoD titles, insignia, uniforms ...). Not so much for the Vets, but the active duty accounts would need to change in order to comply with the new policy.
(14)
(0)
PO3 Justin Bowen
Given the content and tenor of the comments made by some of the people here, one can only hope that RP makes no changes.
I abhor the idea of my tax dollars being used to support bigots, supporters of domestic terrorism, opponents of democratic institutions, supporters of autocratic, neo confederates, anti-intellectuals, and other such people that permeate our military. If RP does nothing, it will be easier for the military to fund people still under contract and get rid of them.
I abhor the idea of my tax dollars being used to support bigots, supporters of domestic terrorism, opponents of democratic institutions, supporters of autocratic, neo confederates, anti-intellectuals, and other such people that permeate our military. If RP does nothing, it will be easier for the military to fund people still under contract and get rid of them.
(1)
(0)
COL Randall C.
Agree they need to be weeded out PO3 Justin Bowen. However, keep in mind that people that don't share your view (whatever it is) aren't extremists. People on both sides of the aisle have been called "domestic terrorists" (one side points to the Capitol riots as proof that they speak "THE TRUTH!" and the other points to the "Summer of Love" riots as proof of "THE TRUTH!" .... one side points to Republican candidates as election deniers and the other side points to Democrat candidates as election deniers. I'm sure the intellectually honest individual can find instances of extreme views on any side.
Maybe your experience is much more varied and wide-spread than the over 32 years I served in uniform, but I saw very few of these extremists that you reference "permeating our military". Absolutely there are bad apples that need to be stomped on when found, but the overwhelming majority of conservative and liberal folks I served with wanted to serve this country with distinction.
Just because someone disagrees with you does not mean they are evil and need to be destroyed.
Maybe your experience is much more varied and wide-spread than the over 32 years I served in uniform, but I saw very few of these extremists that you reference "permeating our military". Absolutely there are bad apples that need to be stomped on when found, but the overwhelming majority of conservative and liberal folks I served with wanted to serve this country with distinction.
Just because someone disagrees with you does not mean they are evil and need to be destroyed.
(4)
(0)
PO3 Justin Bowen
COL Randall C. every definition of terrorism - legal and academic - accurately describes the Jan. 6 terrorists. It's not a matter of perspective; it's what they did.
Oh, and by the way, just because someone wasn't caught committing a crime or engaging in ethically abhorrent - yet still legal - behavior doesn't mean someone served with distinction. I worked with PLENTY of bigots. They were horrible people who did their jobs just as well as anyone else and shouldn't have been in the military.
If we can use the military to push desegregation, normalization of having women in the military, normalization of LGBTQ people I'm the military, acceptance of science (all worthwhile efforts), and many other cultural values not shared by a certain - large - segment of the population, then we can also use the military to turn bigots, terrorism supporters, anti-intellectuals, and so on into the social pariahs that they should be.
They violently attacked the Capitol because they lost the election and wanted to install a dictator. That's literally what they did and why. They weren't protesting "election injustice", peacefully touring the Capitol as tourists, or anything else of that nature. They violently attacked law enforcement officers by the dozens and looted and vandalized the Capitol (per Republicans' own views and Trump's own EO, they deserve 10 years in a federal prison for damaging federal property). Anyone who shares their beliefs and supports their actions does not deserve to be trained by the military, paid by the military, or given access by the military to the vast array of resources that the military has access to.
Oh, and by the way, just because someone wasn't caught committing a crime or engaging in ethically abhorrent - yet still legal - behavior doesn't mean someone served with distinction. I worked with PLENTY of bigots. They were horrible people who did their jobs just as well as anyone else and shouldn't have been in the military.
If we can use the military to push desegregation, normalization of having women in the military, normalization of LGBTQ people I'm the military, acceptance of science (all worthwhile efforts), and many other cultural values not shared by a certain - large - segment of the population, then we can also use the military to turn bigots, terrorism supporters, anti-intellectuals, and so on into the social pariahs that they should be.
They violently attacked the Capitol because they lost the election and wanted to install a dictator. That's literally what they did and why. They weren't protesting "election injustice", peacefully touring the Capitol as tourists, or anything else of that nature. They violently attacked law enforcement officers by the dozens and looted and vandalized the Capitol (per Republicans' own views and Trump's own EO, they deserve 10 years in a federal prison for damaging federal property). Anyone who shares their beliefs and supports their actions does not deserve to be trained by the military, paid by the military, or given access by the military to the vast array of resources that the military has access to.
(1)
(1)
COL Randall C.
PO3 Justin Bowen, you're proving my point. Any items that don't meet with your view of "THE TRUTH!" are discounted because there is only room in this world for one view of "THE TRUTH!" Now, you are not alone in this view because politics have become a religion for the majority of the people and when discussing religion, there is no reasoning about what "faith" is.
I never mentioned that I served with the vast majority people being "ethically abhorrent, yet still legal" - they were ethically sound individuals that had their own reasons for supporting whatever political party they deemed. Again, your long and lengthy career in the military may have been different than mine and the exposure to these bigots/racists that seem to have permeated the military was plain for a lower enlisted vs senior officer. I'm willing to concede that as something that is possible.
I never mentioned that I served with the vast majority people being "ethically abhorrent, yet still legal" - they were ethically sound individuals that had their own reasons for supporting whatever political party they deemed. Again, your long and lengthy career in the military may have been different than mine and the exposure to these bigots/racists that seem to have permeated the military was plain for a lower enlisted vs senior officer. I'm willing to concede that as something that is possible.
(3)
(0)
I am very surprised that the DOD is not specifically saying not to have the Chinese TikTok on any of your personal smartphones.
This article is from the Canadian BroadcastingCorp.
https://www.cbc.ca/news/business/tiktok-fcc-1.6505269
The Canadian government is also against Chinese wawei systems.
Cpl Vic Burk SFC David Reid, M.S, PHR, SHRM-CP, DTM SFC Bernard Walko COL Randall C. Ryan Callahan
This article is from the Canadian BroadcastingCorp.
https://www.cbc.ca/news/business/tiktok-fcc-1.6505269
The Canadian government is also against Chinese wawei systems.
Cpl Vic Burk SFC David Reid, M.S, PHR, SHRM-CP, DTM SFC Bernard Walko COL Randall C. Ryan Callahan
U.S. communications regulator wants TikTok removed from app stores over spying concerns | CBC...
A commissioner with theU.S. communications regulator is asking Apple and Google to consider banning TikTok from their app stores over data security concerns related to the Chinese-owned company.
(8)
(0)
Deborah Gregson
SGT Wayne Grindstaff - It was a bad day when my flip phone was broken. I only use my "smartphone" for texts, calls, and photos (non-location/titled). Banker lady got irritated at me the other day because I wouldn't do banking on my phone and didn't have email access, but I told her I only did that with my home computer that was protected by a firewall.
(6)
(0)
SGT Wayne Grindstaff
Deborah Gregson - I'm only dependent on my phone when I'm on my boat or sidecar rig. I have gone days walking around with a dead phone or forgetting it and leaving it on the charger, my life still continues. More hard feelings and fights have started due to texting and even emails, I have seen it even in my own family where talking directly it wouldn't have happened. JMHO
(1)
(0)
CMSgt Elbert E. Clayton
SGT Wayne Grindstaff - It is not because I'm computer illiterate, but because I refuse to walk around with a telephone, my eyes downcast, and oops, telephone pole ahead of me. I've seen two younger people in the front seat of a car, sitting at a red light, both on cell phones! I wonder are they talking to each other or not. Who is driving the car. And I know there is a "shorthand" used for speed, but much of it is also illiteracy in sentence structure and spelling. I have one complaint about my cheap Flip Tracfone, and that is, I cannot download photos without exhausting my "minutes" by texting them to my computer. If anyone knows an easier and cheaper way, please advise. I'm a month short of 84 years old, started out on Punched Card Accounting (PCAM) machines, moved on to participating in worldwide installation of Burroughs 3500 (very large computer), and eventually Commodore 64s and 128s, and beyond. I despise Windows 10 and now 11. HP is superior to Dell, but both are adequate. Now the "crux" of this dissertation-OPINIONS ARE LIKE A--H---S, EVERYONE HAS ONE. Hope mine offends no one.
(2)
(0)
SGT Wayne Grindstaff
CMSgt Elbert E. Clayton - The rare photo that I need, whether it is sent to me by a friend or if I'm forced to take one, I forward it onto my Son. He then sends it back to my email. My buddies at the skeet range know if they have a picture they want to send me they send it to my email. My phone spent 20mins in the washing machine before I remembered it was in my pants, after 40 minutes in the toaster oven at 375 it still worked.
(1)
(0)
Read This Next