Military YouTube channel offers "unfiltered perspective," vetted to ensure no security compromise

[ProSense]

Military taps YouTube to promote its view of Iraq

Alexandra Zavis, Los Angeles Times

Wednesday, May 2, 2007

(05-02) 04:00 PDT Baghdad -- In one video, a U.S. soldier blasts insurgent gunmen with a heavy sniper rifle as the room fills with smoke. In another, members of an Iraqi family throw their arms around soldiers, weeping and rejoicing, after learning that their kidnapped relative has been freed.

The U.S. military has opened a new front in the Iraq war: cyberspace.

Moving into a realm long dominated by Islamic militants, the military has launched a YouTube channel offering what it calls a boots-on-the-ground perspective. The move recognizes that the Internet is becoming a key battleground for public opinion at a time when domestic support for the war is dwindling.

<…>

Even on a relatively quiet day, footage of soldiers handing soccer balls to delighted Iraqi children is unlikely to be featured on most newscasts. But, Garver said, "the soccer ball story is part of what is happening in Iraq ... and that needs to be recorded somewhere."

<…>

The military says its channel provides an "unfiltered perspective" on the war, but any footage posted is vetted to ensure it does not compromise the security of its troops and operations, violate laws or include excessively gory, disturbing or offensive material. In its first month, the channel was viewed more than 120,000 times and collected more than 1,900 subscribers.

more

Soldiers' freedoms just fade away

Permission to blog freely, sir?

The U.S. Army has ordered soldiers to stop posting to blogs or sending personal e-mail messages, without first clearing the content with a superior officer, Wired News has learned. The directive, issued April 19, is the sharpest restriction on troops’ online activities since the start of the Iraq war. And it could mean the end of military blogs, observers say.

John McCain and George Bush listen to the troops, so we don’t have to. If our soldiers want stop-loss programs, extended tours of duty, unarmored vehicles, roach-filled hospitals, and a futile and endless mission, who are we (or they) to argue?

[ChairmanAgnostic]

1. vetted = unfiltered?

While security on upcoming operations is paramount, too much vetting is a risk.

[babylonsister]

2. Unfiltered my ass! Thanks for posting these side by side; if

the military is filtering soldiers' e-mail viewing and access, you can bet they're 'filtering' the youtube videos. So disingenuous, and both stories out on the same day. They're paying the PR hacks too much.

[Monkeyman]

3. Agree