5:31PM
Austin, TX expeditionary force
Tuesday, October 24, 2006 at 5:31PM As I ponder my rice congee at breakfast in Beijing, here's a nice little example of SysAdmin on the ground.ARTICLE: Austin Police, Fire officials help Iraqis aim for better public services, by Spc. Jason Dangel, 24 October 2006
Thanks to Keith Mitchell for sending this in.
Reader Comments (6)
As I ponder my rice congee at breakfast
I'm so sorry...
For SysAdmin to work the best weapon is truth.
If look at the currentr online NY TImes http://nytimes.com/ you a photo a massive protest in Iraq. The Times story does not discuss the protest.
Managed news is too transparent.
J Canepa: I'm a little confused, who is managing the story that you mention and for what purpose?
I glad you asked as my message could have somewhat confusing. The New York Times this morning featured a front-page photo showing tens of thousands of Iraqis protesting. The caption read that they were protesting an American air strike on civilians in Sadr City. The story linked to the photo, however, did not discuss the protest or the photo. This appeared to me to be someone managing the news by the simple method omitting the fact of the protest or the cause of the protest.
Why? President was shortly to a nationally televised press conference. Showing 100,000 or so Iraqi protesting may have been inconsistent with what the President had to say. A PR type may have noticed and called the Times.
I note that the photo of the protest was shortly pulled from the Times online front page. Even my Google or Yahoo search did not bring back the photo. CBS did give the story the second spot on its 6:30 news, but few could have realized what happened and the implications of what happened in Sadr City.
Guessing, I think there was another overzealous air strike and several civilians died and somebody killed the story.
The point may be that for a good SysAdmin to work, forget about the spin or the lie. Do the right thing, the Austin people are doing in Iraq and you will eventually get good results. Do the wrong thing, an air strike on an apartment building, and you get bad results. Lie about it and things get worse
Two scenarios:
The New York Times, an ultra left anti-Bush paper, kills a story at the request of the White House to help the President's message.
OR
They over reported the story in the first place and since there wasn't much to the stroy it got little play. It is very difficult to get permission to do air strikes, mainly because every time there is one the insurgents claim that we killed civilians. Dropping bombs on apartment buildings on purpose is not really in the game plan, mistakes do happen though.
What makes the idea that the military or the White House could cover up such a story is that they are both horrible at dealing with the media. I wish this wasn't true but it is and it needs to be changed. I agree that we don't need "propaganda" but all news is managed so the military has to start understanding how to put out a message and how that message can hurt or help the mission.
I am sure the folks from Austin Texas have the best intentions, but the only thing Iraq and Austin share in common is that their atmosphere is 20.9% oxygen.