YouTube challenges Pentagon ban
YouTube’s co-founders on Thursday challenged the Pentagon’s assertion that soldiers overseas were sapping too much bandwidth by watching online videos, the military’s principal rationale for blocking popular Web sites from Defense Department computers.
“They said it might be a bandwidth issue, but they created the Internet, so I don’t know what the problem is,”
Chief Executive Chad Hurley said.
Watching or uploading online video does use bandwidth and can slow or tie up a network, but Hurley expressed doubt that soldiers’ use of YouTube could have any real effect on the military’s massive network.
Hurley, Chief Technology Officer Steve Chen and YouTube spokeswoman Julie Supan emphasized that the online video company is trying to work with the Pentagon in hopes the military will reverse course or at least partially repeal the ban.
“We’d like to explore what’s at issue here and talk about what we can do to sort out what’s the issue here,”
Supan said.
Company officials said they were especially puzzled by the block because it came just days after the military launched its own channel on YouTube offering what it calls a “boots-on-the-ground” perspective of scenes of combat.
Chen said YouTube was reaching out to the Pentagon, along with the other banned Web companies, to learn “what it’s going to take to keep the YouTube site up.” He said they were willing to work with the military to install controls on what type of content would be available.
YouTube itself removes images of graphic violence, such as attacks on U.S. soldiers or Iraqi civilians, from its site. The company executives said much of that material clearly falls under its policy banning violent, hateful or pornographic imagery. But they acknowledged that decisions over wartime video present some wrenching questions.
A new Iraqi government policy implemented this month bans news photographers and camera operators from filming bombing scenes, meaning video taken by citizens and uploaded to YouTube could become the only imagery the public sees of such devastation.
“We want to protect the (YouTube) community from being exposed to something violent, but at the same time, we want to educate people on what’s happening around the world,”
Hurley said.
“It’s hard for us.”
The Pentagon said this week it was cutting off service members’ access to YouTube, MySpace and 11 other Web sites, some of which are used by soldiers on the front lines of Iraq and Afghanistan to post videos and journals for friends and family back home.
Army Maj. Ray Ceralde, who helped draft the rules, told The Associated Press that the Pentagon didn’t intend that every Internet posting be reviewed ahead of time. That wouldn’t be practical, he said. And he denied there was any effort to prevent soldiers from creating blogs or posting on them.
But the plain language of the new rules says otherwise: Soldiers must consult with their immediate supervisors “prior to publishing or posting information in a public forum.” Included under the heading of public forum are Web logs and e-mail transmissions.
Another provision allows unit commanders to impose even more restrictive requirements.
What will this mean in practice? Commanders worried about security foul-ups originating from blogs would simply outlaw blogging.
The Army’s sweeping new policy isn’t just aimed at keeping vital operational details off the Internet. The new regulations say that a soldier must:
“Consult with their immediate supervisor and their OPSEC Officer for an OPSEC review prior to publishing or posting information in a public forum. […] This includes, but is not limited to letters, resumes, articles for publication, electronic mail (e-mail), Web site postings, web log (blog) postings, discussion in Internet information forums, discussion in Internet message boards or other forms of dissemination or documentation.”
That sounds like the Army wants to approve every single email or blog comment sent by any of the 154,000 troops in Iraq. Of course, the Army’s public affairs machine has since backtracked, via a press release:
“In no way will every blog post/update a Soldier makes on his or her blog need to be monitored or first approved by an immediate supervisor and Operations Security (OPSEC) officer. After receiving guidance and awareness training from the appointed OPSEC officer, that Soldier blogger is entrusted to practice OPSEC when posting in a public forum.”
But it doesn’t matter what the Army’s public affairs told the media. The unclear and broad regulations still stand. The new rules will have a chilling effect on troops trying responsibly to share their experiences with their families and communities back home. In fact, the rules are just vague enough to make even the most conscientious milbloggers wonder if they’ve crossed the Army’s vague new line. Many, perhaps most, will choose not to take the risk.
Sadly, the wholesale silencing of military bloggers won’t keep American tactics from the insurgency. The ability of our enemies to learn and adapt is well-documented. But the Army’s censorship will keep the world from hearing troops’ stories and learning about what is really happening on the ground.
ap
Stumble it!