Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

US Military Launches YouTube Channel

Posted by Zonk on from the you-can't-stop-the-signal dept.

Jenga717 writes "The US military has launched its own channel on YouTube, in efforts to shift the media's focus of Iraq from a negative to a more positive light, and to 'counter the messages of anti-American sites.' From the article: 'The footage is not picked specifically to show the military in a good light ... and is only edited for reasons of time or content too graphic to be shown on YouTube ... And while all the clips currently posted have been shot by the military's combat cameramen, soldiers and marines have been invited to submit their own clips.' The question is, where are they supposed to submit them? Starting 'on or about 14 May 2007', the Department of Defense will block troop access to Myspace, Youtube, MTV, and more sites, due to a 'growing concern for our unclassified DoD Internet, known as the NIPRNET'." More commentary below. The troops will be unable to access these sites from any computer on the DoD network, yet are still able to access them from their home computers — which they can't use on the DoD network. So why the censorship? The DoD cites security reasons, but the Commander of Global Network Operations (DoD's Joint Task Force)"has noted a significant increase in the use of DoD network resources tied up by individuals visiting certain recreational Internet sites." The PDF released by the DoD reminds troops that this "benefits not only you, your fellow Servicemembers, and Civilian employees, but preserves our vital networks for conducting official DoD business in peace and war." Sounds like quite a sticky situation."

16 of 348 comments (clear)

  1. Isn't that the definition of.... by iknownuttin · · Score: 5, Interesting
    "The US military has launched its own channel on YouTube, in efforts to shift the media's focus of Iraq from a negative to a more positive light, and to 'counter the messages of anti-American sites.'

    Isn't that called "propaganda"?

    --
    I prefer Flambe as apposed flamebait.
    1. Re:Isn't that the definition of.... by LBArrettAnderson · · Score: 2, Interesting

      This is exactly what I mean. Nobody really has a CLUE what is going on right now in Iraq because the media is doing a horrible job depicting what's happening. Negativity sells, and they know that - especially when it comes to America and Bush and republicans.

      If you were to watch any channel other than Fox News during the first part of the war, you would have thought that we were losing - that we were being driven out of the country. Then when the military LIBERATED Iraq from an evil dictator who had murdered thousands upon thousands of people during his life, all of the channels besides Fox News made it seem like we conquered them, like we were raping their women, like we were killing innocent people on purpose.

      I'm sorry, I know that everyone here at slashdot disagrees with me, but luckily I have some karma built up, so I can say something like this.

    2. Re:Isn't that the definition of.... by toddhisattva · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Saying that the military is being objective and the media is the propoganda.. that seems to go a bit beyond objectivity.
      It is about seriousness, which fosters honesty.

      Soldiers are serious.

      Media are a joke.

      Really -- think about the reportage of technical stories. Can you read a newspaper story about IBM's Cell without cringing at the gross oversimplifications and outright distortions? Reporters are morons, and worse, they lie. Doubt me? Get interviewed!

      I have a simple rule about reports from the fronts: if it ain't .mil, it's bullshit.

      At least the military knows what they're talking about, without which objectivity is impossible. Lacking knowledge, the media cannot be objective, and can do nothing but reprint their favorite propaganda from the 20th century.

      The media broadcasts more propaganda than the American military is capable of producing. In the military, it would take three sheets of paperwork for every sheet of propaganda. The media is under no such obligation to document their "work," they can just make shit up when they feel like it and down to the presses it goes.

      The American military is more objective than the media, and less propagandist.
  2. Typical work network rules by Ritchie70 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I understand that being deployed military is quite a bit different from working in an office, but there are many, many sites I can't get to from my desk at work that I can get to at home. If I try to go to somewhere the network gods say I shouldn't, I get a big Websense error message instead.

    Gaming sites? Filtered. Hacking sites? Filtered. Gambling and porn as well (I assume, haven't tried those.) Recently, they've figured out how to filter the google cache of pages sometimes, too.

    Unfortunately, sometimes the hacker sites have been the sites with the info I need for work, but the guy two cubes down has a VPN to his home up most of the time, or I just wait until I go home and look stuff up there.

    --
    The preferred solution is to not have a problem.
  3. blatant censorship by evwah · · Score: 4, Interesting

    the whole bit about footage too graphic for you tube... well by its very nature that is what puts the military in a bad light. sounds like propaganda to me.

    on another note... I'm in the air force, and for quite some time the base network has blocked access to the following (though some of the blocks have since been rescinded):
    1.e-bay
    2.something awful
    3.any flash content
    4.any URL with the word "game" in it
    5.any URL with the word "forum" in it
    6.countless other harmless sites that don't come to mind right now

  4. Is that classified? by John+Vai · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Here is a nice video from the good american army educating the Iraqi population?
    Is that the kind of classified information we should not allow the marines to post?
    http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=6c4_1176720508&p=1

    John Vai

    1. Re:Is that classified? by sponga · · Score: 2, Interesting

      That was in Afghanistan and not Iraq before you get too many 'interesting' mod points for false info even though it says 'Life as a Grunt in Afghanistan'; besides it doesn't rain there like in the video and they have nowhere near the good weed/hash that Afghanistan has. I was over in Afghanistan and brought back an ounce of Afghan Hash after getting injured; one of the little Afghan kids tried to extort charges from me for more money and said if I didn't pay more he would go tell my Sarge.

      The situation is different in Afghanistan and people are not as hostile as I hear it is in Iraq; although the situation has gotten a little more aggressive over there in the last few months especially in the Northeastern section.

      While were on videos here is a nice one in Iraq of a cute little Kurdish Iraq girl; well she was cute until the Muslims got to her.
      http://www.filecabi.net/video/horrific-stone.html
      We would see this all the time though when the husband would literally beat the wife into a bloody mess or a punching blow right to her head stunning her not to talk to us; yeah that shit is intense over there and the least of my worries is a couple of soldiers telling some foreigners to say thing they don't understand.
      More actual Iraq videos and not ones from Afghanistan; not propaganda but actual soldier shot footage
      http://www.filecabi.net/video/executegen.html
      http://www.filecabi.net/video/getting_rocked-fixed .html
      http://www.filecabi.net/video/Hunt_For_Insurgents. html

  5. Points of view by Hemogoblin · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Even if the military is spreading propaganda, it is always good to listen to all sides in a debate. Even if you disagree with someone its a great idea to learn why they hold a certain belief. Once you understand someone's point of view, it is easier to persuade them to change their mind or to argue against them. Its even possible that you might agree with them.

    Heres a cute comic that neatly summarizes what I mean: http://xkcd.com/c106.html

  6. War Crimes Clips by MrSteveSD · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I don't suppose they will be posting these:

    The famous "Awe Dude" air-strike on a crowd of civilians. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hQUK5rA4DaI

    Or this apparent murder of civilians driving by in their cars. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xnyjH5wusqs

    Or the Apache killing these unarmed men in a farmers field, working on a tractor. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qmZRyNd6ru8

    Or executing a wounded Iraqi http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0W41srr6CQU

    Blowing up Mosque's doesn't look so good either. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lFVnqUJWsiU

    1. Re:War Crimes Clips by couchslug · · Score: 4, Interesting

      "Or the Apache killing these unarmed men in a farmers field, working on a tractor."

      I notice you selected the SNIPPED version. Here's a link to the full version.
      Watch old boy play "hide the SA7", using his buddies and their equipment as cover. Note the whole interaction between the people, including the initial conversation by the car and the rapid ditching of the weapon in the field. I contemptuously defy anyone to link these behaviors to tractor repair. I work on ag equipment and tractors, and there is nothing among my parts stash or tool collection that is the size and shape of a handheld SAM tube. That is no grain drill section (note the dangling end cap when he runs), PTO shaft, or similar.

      http://www.murdoconline.net/archives/001763.html

      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1wdJo-eoLxI (search 'helicopter kills" and compare versions)

      "Or executing a wounded Iraqi"

      How would/do/have YOU act/acted when you suspect(ed) an enemy fighter may be "playing possum"?

      http://en.wikinews.org/wiki/U.S._Navy_finds_soldie r_shot_wounded_Iraqi_at_Fallujah_in_self_defense

      "A known tactic of anti-Iraqi forces (AIF) is to feign injury or death, and the marine could reasonably claim they were still a threat."

      "Blowing up Mosque's doesn't look so good either."

      Nor does using them for military purposes, which removes their protected status under the GC.

      "Or this apparent murder of civilians driving by in their cars."

      All we have is a "stovepiped" view from a cam, with no overall context as to what actions were taking place nearby. Note the cameraman, "Doc" comments that no unarmed people were harmed, and he would probably have been in a position to view the cleanup. Those vehicles could have done a driveby or similar off-camera, but we don't know either way.

      "The famous "Awe Dude" air-strike on a crowd of civilians."

      Post-strike assertions go both ways, but the ground controller called it in during the ground battle.
      What did he see that we didn't?
      All we see from the video is a group of people moving purposefully in one general direction.

      Ideology-based conjecture is not proof.

      --
      "This post is an artistic work of fiction and falsehood. Only a fool would take anything posted here as fact."
  7. Re:See All of you! by DittoBox · · Score: 4, Interesting

    The abuses are isolated. The enlisted men that are honestly "good guys" trying to to good in a bad situation are many and plenty. The crap reasons that we're over there is another story but the everyday soldiers bearing the brunt of it take it really well and do a lot of good. I agree its a fubar situation but the average enlisted guy dealing with it over there is doing a damn fine job.

    --
    Good. Cheap. Fast. Pick Two.
  8. Re:See All of you! by Shihar · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I would say it is safe to say that the number of soldiers handing out candy and flowers vastly outnumbers the numbers that are stacking up naked Iraqi's in pyramids.

    Personally, I am sympathetic to the idea. Not every soldier that goes to Iraq raps a few women and then guns down some kids. Hell, the entire 'surge' is based around the idea of sacrificing more Americans to save more Iraqis. Right now US soldiers are setting practically undefended in outposts all over Baghdad instead of turtling up in their bases and air striking anything that looks threatening. The point of the shift in strategy was basically to put Americans more in the line of fire and restrain the force they can use so that fewer civilians die. They are focusing on civilian protection instead of force protection.

    I don't think people fully realize what this means. We KNOW that more soldiers will die as we expose them in an effort to defend the civilian population. I am sympathetic that the army is a tad irritated at being called baby killers while everyone ignores the fact that they are paying in American blood to reduce civilian casualties inflicted by both collateral damage and intentional terrorist/sectarian attacks.

    Now, it can certainly be argued that this is a complete waste of American lives. It can certainly be argued that we would be better off to saying we are sorry for kicking over their iron fisted dictator that kept them you line, write out a big check, and tell them good luck on not committing genocide against each other. That said, give the army some credit. They are being told to pay in their own blood to achieve some political objective. If they want to show that they do more then gun down civilians, let them. God forbid anything other then tragedy be reported from Iraq.

  9. Department of Government Duplication Department by davmoo · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Is there really some reason they needed this when they already have DVIDS?

    --
    I want a new quote. One that won't spill. One that don't cost too much. Or come in a pill.
  10. Re:The war at home. by dangitman · · Score: 2, Interesting

    It just pisses me off that everyone is pushing their agendas via a medium that has such potential to empower.

    You're pissed off that people are using a medium with potential to empower, to empower themselves? Hmmmm. Doesn't make a lot of sense.

    --
    ... and then they built the supercollider.
  11. Re:The truth by Anonymous+Cowpat · · Score: 3, Interesting

    To paraphrase Douglas Adams: 'Anyone who wants a position of authority should under no circumstances be allowed to do the job'

    --
    FGD 135
  12. Re:What the Anti-War/Anti-Troops Crowd wants... by A1C+Lickey · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Sorry, but I have to disagree. I am one of the troops and believe me there really are people who are still anti-troops. Some people do still freak out when we try to do normal everyday things. I've been called freak, monster, murderer, nazi, and baby killer. Now I'm not saying a large portion of the population is anti-troops; for the most part people can separate between the war and the troops.

    And it's no surprise that DOD will be uniformly blocking access to these sites, for several years it has been specifically forbidden by the regs to us DOD computers for personal use. By most accounts, Myspace, YouTube, and the like are all for personal use. In fact many bases already block these sites on their networks. And it isn't censorship either. The government is paying for that bandwidth for official use only. We can't have our networks go down because too many people are trying to read their personal e-mail or post videos online, for the military this is our job, this is what we do every day.

    There are plenty of sources of information that the military can't spin. If we want to we can post on Myspace or YouTube from our personal machines. If you're in the desert then you can visit those sites from the computers in the MWR center (Morale, Welfare, Recreation Center) or from the internet cafe if the base has one.