Difference between revisions of "Globalisation:Information Operations Task Force"
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
=Introduction= | =Introduction= | ||
| − | + | The Information Operations Task Force was the direct successor of The Office of Strategic Influence. It is an information operations section of the Pentagon which works to further the objectives set out in the Information operations Roadmap. Little current Information exists on the Information Task Force, It is unclear to the Author whether the organisation still exists under the same name, regardless, it is a virtual certainty that the operations are still being carried out, whatever the name of the department is. | |
=Inception= | =Inception= | ||
| − | The [[Information Operations Task Force]] is a division of the [[Department of Defense]] which has taken on many of the functions of the [[Office of Strategic Influence]] which was shut down in 2002. <ref>[http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/story/8798997/the_man_who_sold_the_war/print The Man Who Sold The War], by by James Bamford ''Rolling Stone'', November 17, 2005</ref> The | + | The [[Information Operations Task Force]] is a division of the [[Department of Defense]] which has taken on many of the functions of the [[Office of Strategic Influence]] which was shut down in 2002. <ref>[http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/story/8798997/the_man_who_sold_the_war/print The Man Who Sold The War], by by James Bamford ''Rolling Stone'', November 17, 2005</ref> The Office of Strategic Influence was a department which worked on a broad spectrum of information operations. A senior Pentagon official stated that "'It goes from the blackest of black programs to the whitest of white'” <ref>[http://www.nytimes.com/2002/02/19/international/19PENT.html?pagewanted=1 Pentagon Readies Efforts to Sway Sentiment Abroad], by ERIC SCHMITT and James DAO, “New York Times'', February 27, 2002</ref> The Office of Strategic Influence was shut down because of a huge negative backlash by the media, and society in general, to its proposed operations. Donald Rumsfield stated that “commentaries and editorial cartoons about the office's proposed activities made it impossible for it to do its job”. <ref>[http://www.nytimes.com/2002/02/27/international/27MILI. A 'Damaged' Information Office Is Declared Closed by Rumsfeld], ERIC SCHMITT and James DAO, “New York Times'', February 18, 2002</ref> However Rumsfield made it clear that just because the Office of Strategic Influence had closed this was not the end of information operations within the pentagon. This was reinforced by his statement on the matter: "Fine, you want to savage this thing, fine. I'll give you the corpse. There's the name. You can have the name, but I'm going to keep doing every single thing that needs to be done, and I have." <ref>[ http://www.spinwatch.org.uk/-news-by-category-mainmenu-9/149-iraq/544-truth-be-told-lies-are-part-of-pentagon-strategy Truth be told, lies are part of Pentagon strategy], JOSEPH L. GALLOWAY, “Spinwatch, December 8, 2004</ref> |
=Operations= | =Operations= | ||
The Information Operations Task Force is structured to seek information dominance in arenas of conflict. This comes as part of the United States strategy of seeking full spectrum dominance in theatres of war. David Miller observes that the new age of Information dominance sees a divergance from the traditional military propaganda model to an era where there is no distinction between propaganda and journalism and both are seen as “weaponized Information”. <ref>[http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2004/jan/08/usa.iraqandthemedia The Domination Effect], by David Miller,'' The Guardian'', Janaury 8, 2004</ref> | The Information Operations Task Force is structured to seek information dominance in arenas of conflict. This comes as part of the United States strategy of seeking full spectrum dominance in theatres of war. David Miller observes that the new age of Information dominance sees a divergance from the traditional military propaganda model to an era where there is no distinction between propaganda and journalism and both are seen as “weaponized Information”. <ref>[http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2004/jan/08/usa.iraqandthemedia The Domination Effect], by David Miller,'' The Guardian'', Janaury 8, 2004</ref> | ||
| − | The Information Operations Task Force is a military organisation based in Baghdad and is part of the | + | The Information Operations Task Force is a military organisation based in Baghdad and is part of the Multinational Corps headquarters commanded by Army Lt. Gen. [[John R. Vines]].<ref>Mark Mazzetti and Borzou Daragahi, [http://articles.latimes.com/2005/nov/30/world/fg-infowar30 U.S. Military Covertly Pays to Run Stories in Iraqi Press], Los Angeles Times, November 30, 2005, Accessed on 15-Feb-2010</ref> The Information Operations Task Force was tasked to set up and run an ‘information war room’ which could monitor worldwide news sources and identify stories of interest before they were even aggregated at press agencies and subsequently published. Once potentially damaging stories had been identified it was then the duty of the Information Operations Task Force to ensure that counter propaganda was disseminated to negate the effect of the initial story.<ref>[http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/story/8798997/the_man_who_sold_the_war/print The Man Who Sold The War], by James Bamford, ''Rolling Stone'', November 17, 2005</ref> In order to achieve such counter propaganda the Information Operations Task Force paid Iraqi newspapers to disseminate news stories written by American military sources which presented a favourable image of the American action in the country. Although the news stories largely had at least some basis in fact they presented a one sided view of the news and the editors of the newspapers in question were not always aware that what they were printing was essentially propaganda from the US Government. <ref>Mark Mazzetti and Borzou Daragahi, [http://articles.latimes.com/2005/nov/30/world/fg-infowar30 U.S. Military Covertly Pays to Run Stories in Iraqi Press], Los Angeles Times, November 30, 2005, Accessed on 15-Feb-2010</ref> |
=Contractors= | =Contractors= | ||
| + | To achieve the goals of the Information Operations Task Force the Pentagon hired two key contractors, each of these agencies had a separate role in ensuring the successful running of information operations and counter propaganda. Both of the contractors in question have a long history of working closely with the pentagon and have been the joint recipients of contracts worth over $400M from the Pentagon <ref>[http://msnbc.msn.com/id/10285246/ Report: "U.S. paying Iraqi journalists,"] [[Hardball]]/MSNBC, December 1, 2005.</ref> | ||
==Rendon Group== | ==Rendon Group== | ||
| − | According to the Pentagon documents, the [[Rendon Group]] played a major role in the | + | According to the Pentagon documents, the [[Rendon Group]] played a major role in the Information Operations Task Force. The company was charged with creating an "Information War Room" to monitor worldwide news reports at lightning speed and respond almost instantly with counter propaganda.<ref>[http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/story/8798997/the_man_who_sold_the_war/print The Man Who Sold The War], by James Bamford, ''Rolling Stone'', November 17, 2005</ref>. Thus it can be seen that the key role of the Rendon Group was to identify potentially negative stories before they broke in the press. |
==Lincoln Group== | ==Lincoln Group== | ||
| − | The [[Lincoln Group]] also played a significant role in the | + | The [[Lincoln Group]] also played a significant role in the Information Operations Task Force in which their part was to ensure that American material was translated and published in Iraqi newspapers. In this it was intended that the editors of the publications would not be aware of the source of the content and would often be led to believe it was the work of the Lincoln group employee who would pose as a journalist. <ref>[http://articles.latimes.com/2005/nov/30/world/fg-infowar30 U.S. Military Covertly Pays to Run Stories in Iraqi Press], Los Angeles Times, November 30, 2005, Accessed on 15-Feb-2010</ref> |
| − | The pentagon signed contracts with Lincoln Group | + | The pentagon signed contracts with Lincoln Group, with a maximum value of $100M to place news articles written by the Information Operations Task Force in the Iraqi press. The specific job of one Lincoln Group employee was to ensure that there were 'No fingerprints' which could lead back to the source of the articles.<ref>Andrew Buncombe, [http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/the-us-propaganda-machine-oh-what-a-lovely-war-472002.html The US propaganda machine: Oh, what a lovely war], The Independent, 30 March 2006, Accessed on 15-Feb-2010</ref> It is also alleged in ''The Independent'' that quotes said to be from Iraqi officials or citizens were routinely fabricated by US troops who had never left the green zone in Baghdad.<ref>Andrew Buncombe, [http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/the-us-propaganda-machine-oh-what-a-lovely-war-472002.html The US propaganda machine: Oh, what a lovely war], The Independent, 30 March 2006, Accessed on 15-Feb-2010</ref>. Although these stories may have had a basis in truth it is clear that they were far from (for example) factual accounts of battles written by someone who had been there, and this is how they were represented. |
=Pentagon Investigation= | =Pentagon Investigation= | ||
| − | + | When this operation originally came to light there was a Pentagon investigation into the stories which Lincoln Group had produced. This investigation cleared them of any wrongdoing and found the stories to be factually correct and as such did not constitute propaganda. <ref>Andrew Buncombe, [http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/the-us-propaganda-machine-oh-what-a-lovely-war-472002.html The US propaganda machine: Oh, what a lovely war], The Independent, 30 March 2006, Accessed on 15-Feb-2010</ref> | |
| − | When this operation originally came to light there was a Pentagon investigation into the stories which Lincoln Group had produced. This investigation cleared them of any wrongdoing and found the stories to be factually correct. | ||
| − | |||
=Wider Implications= | =Wider Implications= | ||
Although there is no law against the US military carrying out psychological operations or disseminating news through foreign media. It is illegal, through US law, for them to do this within the United States. It has been argued by a private contractor to the Pentagon that, "There is no longer any way to separate foreign media from domestic media. Those neat lines don't exist anymore"<ref>Mark Mazzetti and Borzou Daragahi, [http://articles.latimes.com/2005/nov/30/world/fg-infowar30 U.S. Military Covertly Pays to Run Stories in Iraqi Press], Los Angeles Times, November 30, 2005, Accessed on 15-Feb-2010</ref>. if this is accepted as the case then it is possible that the stories published in Iraq could be picked up and run by US media outlets in which case the law would have been broken. | Although there is no law against the US military carrying out psychological operations or disseminating news through foreign media. It is illegal, through US law, for them to do this within the United States. It has been argued by a private contractor to the Pentagon that, "There is no longer any way to separate foreign media from domestic media. Those neat lines don't exist anymore"<ref>Mark Mazzetti and Borzou Daragahi, [http://articles.latimes.com/2005/nov/30/world/fg-infowar30 U.S. Military Covertly Pays to Run Stories in Iraqi Press], Los Angeles Times, November 30, 2005, Accessed on 15-Feb-2010</ref>. if this is accepted as the case then it is possible that the stories published in Iraq could be picked up and run by US media outlets in which case the law would have been broken. | ||
| − | |||
=Concluding Remarks= | =Concluding Remarks= | ||
| − | + | The very existence of the Information Operations Task Force shows that information warfare is a reality and that governments are engaging in strategies to control media to their advantage. It is therefore of crucial importance that there is an understanding that the media may be used in this way so that people are aware that the information which they are reading may have been manufactured by the military. | |
=Notes= | =Notes= | ||
<references/> | <references/> | ||
Latest revision as of 16:52, 22 April 2010
Contents
Introduction
The Information Operations Task Force was the direct successor of The Office of Strategic Influence. It is an information operations section of the Pentagon which works to further the objectives set out in the Information operations Roadmap. Little current Information exists on the Information Task Force, It is unclear to the Author whether the organisation still exists under the same name, regardless, it is a virtual certainty that the operations are still being carried out, whatever the name of the department is.
Inception
The Information Operations Task Force is a division of the Department of Defense which has taken on many of the functions of the Office of Strategic Influence which was shut down in 2002. [1] The Office of Strategic Influence was a department which worked on a broad spectrum of information operations. A senior Pentagon official stated that "'It goes from the blackest of black programs to the whitest of white'” [2] The Office of Strategic Influence was shut down because of a huge negative backlash by the media, and society in general, to its proposed operations. Donald Rumsfield stated that “commentaries and editorial cartoons about the office's proposed activities made it impossible for it to do its job”. [3] However Rumsfield made it clear that just because the Office of Strategic Influence had closed this was not the end of information operations within the pentagon. This was reinforced by his statement on the matter: "Fine, you want to savage this thing, fine. I'll give you the corpse. There's the name. You can have the name, but I'm going to keep doing every single thing that needs to be done, and I have." [4]
Operations
The Information Operations Task Force is structured to seek information dominance in arenas of conflict. This comes as part of the United States strategy of seeking full spectrum dominance in theatres of war. David Miller observes that the new age of Information dominance sees a divergance from the traditional military propaganda model to an era where there is no distinction between propaganda and journalism and both are seen as “weaponized Information”. [5]
The Information Operations Task Force is a military organisation based in Baghdad and is part of the Multinational Corps headquarters commanded by Army Lt. Gen. John R. Vines.[6] The Information Operations Task Force was tasked to set up and run an ‘information war room’ which could monitor worldwide news sources and identify stories of interest before they were even aggregated at press agencies and subsequently published. Once potentially damaging stories had been identified it was then the duty of the Information Operations Task Force to ensure that counter propaganda was disseminated to negate the effect of the initial story.[7] In order to achieve such counter propaganda the Information Operations Task Force paid Iraqi newspapers to disseminate news stories written by American military sources which presented a favourable image of the American action in the country. Although the news stories largely had at least some basis in fact they presented a one sided view of the news and the editors of the newspapers in question were not always aware that what they were printing was essentially propaganda from the US Government. [8]
Contractors
To achieve the goals of the Information Operations Task Force the Pentagon hired two key contractors, each of these agencies had a separate role in ensuring the successful running of information operations and counter propaganda. Both of the contractors in question have a long history of working closely with the pentagon and have been the joint recipients of contracts worth over $400M from the Pentagon [9]
Rendon Group
According to the Pentagon documents, the Rendon Group played a major role in the Information Operations Task Force. The company was charged with creating an "Information War Room" to monitor worldwide news reports at lightning speed and respond almost instantly with counter propaganda.[10]. Thus it can be seen that the key role of the Rendon Group was to identify potentially negative stories before they broke in the press.
Lincoln Group
The Lincoln Group also played a significant role in the Information Operations Task Force in which their part was to ensure that American material was translated and published in Iraqi newspapers. In this it was intended that the editors of the publications would not be aware of the source of the content and would often be led to believe it was the work of the Lincoln group employee who would pose as a journalist. [11]
The pentagon signed contracts with Lincoln Group, with a maximum value of $100M to place news articles written by the Information Operations Task Force in the Iraqi press. The specific job of one Lincoln Group employee was to ensure that there were 'No fingerprints' which could lead back to the source of the articles.[12] It is also alleged in The Independent that quotes said to be from Iraqi officials or citizens were routinely fabricated by US troops who had never left the green zone in Baghdad.[13]. Although these stories may have had a basis in truth it is clear that they were far from (for example) factual accounts of battles written by someone who had been there, and this is how they were represented.
Pentagon Investigation
When this operation originally came to light there was a Pentagon investigation into the stories which Lincoln Group had produced. This investigation cleared them of any wrongdoing and found the stories to be factually correct and as such did not constitute propaganda. [14]
Wider Implications
Although there is no law against the US military carrying out psychological operations or disseminating news through foreign media. It is illegal, through US law, for them to do this within the United States. It has been argued by a private contractor to the Pentagon that, "There is no longer any way to separate foreign media from domestic media. Those neat lines don't exist anymore"[15]. if this is accepted as the case then it is possible that the stories published in Iraq could be picked up and run by US media outlets in which case the law would have been broken.
Concluding Remarks
The very existence of the Information Operations Task Force shows that information warfare is a reality and that governments are engaging in strategies to control media to their advantage. It is therefore of crucial importance that there is an understanding that the media may be used in this way so that people are aware that the information which they are reading may have been manufactured by the military.
Notes
- ↑ The Man Who Sold The War, by by James Bamford Rolling Stone, November 17, 2005
- ↑ Pentagon Readies Efforts to Sway Sentiment Abroad, by ERIC SCHMITT and James DAO, “New York Times, February 27, 2002
- ↑ A 'Damaged' Information Office Is Declared Closed by Rumsfeld, ERIC SCHMITT and James DAO, “New York Times, February 18, 2002
- ↑ [ http://www.spinwatch.org.uk/-news-by-category-mainmenu-9/149-iraq/544-truth-be-told-lies-are-part-of-pentagon-strategy Truth be told, lies are part of Pentagon strategy], JOSEPH L. GALLOWAY, “Spinwatch, December 8, 2004
- ↑ The Domination Effect, by David Miller, The Guardian, Janaury 8, 2004
- ↑ Mark Mazzetti and Borzou Daragahi, U.S. Military Covertly Pays to Run Stories in Iraqi Press, Los Angeles Times, November 30, 2005, Accessed on 15-Feb-2010
- ↑ The Man Who Sold The War, by James Bamford, Rolling Stone, November 17, 2005
- ↑ Mark Mazzetti and Borzou Daragahi, U.S. Military Covertly Pays to Run Stories in Iraqi Press, Los Angeles Times, November 30, 2005, Accessed on 15-Feb-2010
- ↑ Report: "U.S. paying Iraqi journalists," Hardball/MSNBC, December 1, 2005.
- ↑ The Man Who Sold The War, by James Bamford, Rolling Stone, November 17, 2005
- ↑ U.S. Military Covertly Pays to Run Stories in Iraqi Press, Los Angeles Times, November 30, 2005, Accessed on 15-Feb-2010
- ↑ Andrew Buncombe, The US propaganda machine: Oh, what a lovely war, The Independent, 30 March 2006, Accessed on 15-Feb-2010
- ↑ Andrew Buncombe, The US propaganda machine: Oh, what a lovely war, The Independent, 30 March 2006, Accessed on 15-Feb-2010
- ↑ Andrew Buncombe, The US propaganda machine: Oh, what a lovely war, The Independent, 30 March 2006, Accessed on 15-Feb-2010
- ↑ Mark Mazzetti and Borzou Daragahi, U.S. Military Covertly Pays to Run Stories in Iraqi Press, Los Angeles Times, November 30, 2005, Accessed on 15-Feb-2010
