How does DoDD 1344.10 (Political Activities by Members of the Armed Forces ) impact social media?

DoDD 1344.10 is "medium independant" and the basis of allowed/prohibited political activities by service members.

For example, the DoDD prohibits those on active duty from creating partisan political articles or letters that solicit votes for or against a partisan political party, candidate, or cause. It doesn't matter if that article is in a book, in a flyer being handed out or on a social media platform.

While DoDD 1344.10 hasn't been changed since 2008, there have been numerous social media directives, instructions and guides issued by the Services and OSD (such as section 8 of DoDI 5400.17*, the Army's Social Media Guide*).

Technically, active duty users on this and other "military affiliated sites" often run afoul of the main rule that "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". However, that rarely is enforced by leadership unless that personal account violates some other rule of conduct that is more serious (i.e., trying to leverage their official position for personal gain, disclosing non-public information through the account, etc).

As we all know, depending on the status they are in, there are activities that military cannot do that a non-military affiliated civilian can do. A non-retired veteran is completely free of those constraints, and to a lesser degree so are reservists and retirees, but nevertheless the applicable constraints are there and active duty service members often run afoul of them.

While there isn't some witch-hunt going on to find active duty service members that violate the prohibitions against certain political activities, an active duty service member is obviously more restricted in what they can and cannot say online, just as they are restricted in what they can and cannot do in person.

I remember a comment made by a Soldier going through a court martial back when I was a 1LT. The judge asked if they wanted to say anything and their comment was, "Sir, I didn't realize that when I signed up to protect the rights and freedoms of others that I was giving up my own."
---------------------------------------
* DoDI 5400.17 (updated 1/24/23) - https://www.esd.whs.mil/Portals/54/Documents/DD/issuances/dodi/540017p.PDF#page=24
* U.S. Army Social Media Guide - https://www.army.mil/socialmedia/

It only exposes us.

There are a lot of policies, regulations, and laws most of us are unfamiliar with. Getting too aggressive with our opinions might cross anyone of those lines.

No one probably cares what a reserve CPT has to say.

I took a trip recently to Washington DC (visit museums, etc...) I remember thinking wow, I thought I was hot stuff when I was company commander as a 1LT. Here I am in DC, and in the bigger picture there are tens if not hundreds of thousands of folks between me and the top.

Maybe a COL looking to get BG will be looked at with active scrutiny.

However even us PEONS have our level of unit politics to balance. If we tow the line with our comments we are safer from others pointing out our brain fog when we cross the line.

The most eye opening opinions I see from Generals all have "RET" after their rank and titles.