Hello people, as finals week is approaching I am trying with all my power to finish strong, or should I say army strong? No, I personally will most likely ever participate in anything that has to do with an army directly. At least I hope so, I think we all would step up and protect our home if it would come to that, however, I personally think there always are solutions that should be enabled ahead of war. I hope that we as a human race, will come to a point where soldiers are no longer needed. However, at this point we are far away from that. Especially in the Unites State, who has the largest military budget in the world. At this point you might be thinking, what does this have to with Social media policy?
Well you see the US Army as any organization utilize social media, and they have been smart enough to create a social media policy. You can find it here, US Army I actually believe that the policy that they have in place is not only unique, but quite on point. As I hope you can imagine the US Army faces obstacles that are at the very least different form any other organization in America. One of the points that was made is the importance of geo tagging, and to avoid it as a soldier. As they are in the business of surviving, the US Army has deemed the geo tag as dangerous. The obvious reason being that they do not want the enemy to be aware of their location.
It was a policy that really made me realize that incorporating and exploring brand identity is essential for anyone. The first guidelines did approach the classical army rules, that we so often have seen in movies. Discipline, and to never go against those who are higher ranked than yourself. As they put it, any comments regarding member of the army will be dealt with in the dammer manner as if it was said to his face with everyone to hear it. You do not stop being a soldier just because you are utilizing social media.
There was also an interesting point regarding those who died in combat, strictly forbidden to mention names, locations, occasion until 24 hours after the person in questions family had been notified. A sign of respect and virtue regarding the dead, and the importance to the army to ensure that they will deliver the awful news to the families of those who are fallen. Similar rules were applied for soldiers who were missing in action, in order to ensure their safety no one is allowed to post about them, if an attack had been made it could be crucial to not allow the enemy the knowledge of potential survivors.
However, the most interesting part to be is how the Army clearly stated that they see social media as a way to clarify ad educate the public regarding their mission and how they happen. A case study that they had illustrated how the media had reported on a combat, and the US Army later posted a video from the combat that clearly showed how misinformed the reporting had been and provided people with a clear picture of what had actually happened. It also stated that social media is a two way conversation and that the US Army are not only obliged to respond but that they do so gladly. It is a way for them to further educate the public, and engage and connect with family and friends as well as the public.
Lastly, I want to point out that their guideline did an excellent job in explaining what every platform is, and what the usage and interaction should and could be like. I especially enjoyed the social media dictionary that in a simple sentence or two to explain what a hashtag or Facebook is.
Do you think the army should be active on social? If so what ethical implications might they run into?