Blogs as a weapon. Why Ukraine wins the information war against the Russian Federation
This tweet has gained more than 14,000 likes and almost two thousand retweets. Another tweet, published by the Ukrainian soldier the same day about the same storm, said simply: "What I did to destroy the Russian pontoon bridge through the Seversky Donets. " In this tweet, the ammunition specialist told about his personal role in the attack. He wrote how he explored the place, instructed the observers to listen to the sound of Russian motor boats and brought artillery to crossing the river.
The tweet flew quickly, gaining more than 45,000 likes, over 12,000 retweets and becoming a major source of information for Newsweek, France24 and other news blogs. Focus has translated Todd Helmus about how Ukraine is fighting in the information field of war against the Russian Federation. Many have already been said about the striking success of Ukraine in the field of information struggle.
Russia - the leading world power in propaganda and misinformation - was staged by a country that many considered an outsider. There are many reasons for this success. President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, an actor who became a statesman, will overcome Vladimir Putin at every step. Ukraine also benefits from its status as an outsider and a sovereign country, which the foreign state invaded. Russia's aggression and war crimes were so uncovered that Ukrainian communication was successful.
But the lessons of Ukraine do not end there, proving the enormous force of the campaign to distribute messages, which relies on ordinary Ukrainian citizens and soldiers who place pro -Ukrainian content directly on their social networks. This tactic is not new: commercial companies have long used this strategy to convince their brands. The US Armed Forces could be taken into service not only to win wars, but may also solve a problem with a set of new servicemen.
The US army should not only encourage, but also provide soldiers, sailors, pilots and marines to tell their stories about social networks. This model has worked both in Ukraine and for many Fortune 500 companies, which have established principles for the so -called employee protection programs. For the US military, this approach is associated with a certain risk.
However, the potential gain is great and can help create very personal and convincing narratives about the armed forces at a time when such stories are essential. To do this, the Ministry of Defense should consider developing their own program of protection of interests of servicemen through employees who are familiar with social networks, teaching their rules and encouraging successful content creators.
It should also develop a template on how these infloensers can support future military operations. For any person who monitors the course of the war on social networks, it is obvious that the government-sanctioned accounts are only a small part of the content related to the war. Civilians of Ukraine, which have almost 43 million people, undoubtedly provide most of this content. Margo Gontar is a Ukrainian journalist who broadcasts signals of air alarm sirens that dominate Kiev.
It has more than 30 thousand subscribers. But the Ukrainian soldiers have their own staff of Internet users: it is unclear to the extent to which the Ministry of Defense of Ukraine coordinates or stimulates such activities, although it seems reasonable that the military is imposing restrictions to prevent, say, the issuance of geolocation or demonstration of secret objects. However, it seems obvious that the ministry allows some servicemen to use social networks and benefits.
These accounts serve as a multiplier for the force for Ukraine, exceeding the amount of content that could create any official account, and in the aggregate covering a much larger audience. People and persons behind these accounts establish personal connection with their subscribers. It helps to personalize content and war much more than any pretty propaganda video.
In the end, many Americans and Europeans mention the war, its cost and tactical victories of Ukraine every time they look at Twitter or Tiktok. These lessons are not unique to Ukraine. The business community has been enjoying online voting for over ten years.
They do this with various programs, from the support of influence agents and very popular YouTube stars to Sunday Radio performed by ordinary social networks, as well as programs that encourage employees to talk about products and their own impressions of them. Many leading corporations seek to use true and deserve to trust the voice on the Internet. This movement is based on the fundamental characteristic of the modern era of social networks.
Social media and their static predecessor - blogs - destroyed barriers, erected by traditional media. Anyone can create a blog, YouTube video, or any social networks at all, and potentially it can turn into a viral and win fans. This is well known. However, this change has led to a revolution about confidence in communications. Why trust a brand that praises its benefits if you can rely on Facebook experience, which is nothing to hide? The survey confirms this.
The annual Edelman Trust World Barometer shows that since 2012, a subject who has been trusted more than companies, government officials or journalists is "a person who looks like you. " Another study shows that social networks are more likely to trust the recommendations of "ordinary social network users" than experts, celebrities or online stars. It is here that programs to protect the interests of employees can bring large dividends.
Like the soldiers who carry the burden of Ukrainian media acam, company employees are a natural source of social influence. Their lives and livelihoods turn around the company, providing rich experience that can be used to create social content. Many of them are loyal to their employers, which creates a natural incentive to place positive content. With a number of measures, employers can form content that will be created.
Employers develop programs for training on social networks that improve the quality and impact of employees, establish and ensure compliance with rules that help employees not share the content that harm the company and create incentives that motivate social behavior. Many companies, given Starbucks, Dell and Reebok, have developed employees' support programs. One of the most famous employees' protection programs is Adobe, which manufactures Photoshop, Lightroom, PDF and others.
Adobe has been holding an official program for the protection of employees' interests for over eight years. In an interview with one of the interviewers, the head of the Adobe Protection Department Ronie Manis said: "People do business with people, not with brands, so business makes sense to bring their employees to the stage. " Adobe has developed a special program that encourages employees to talk about a brand on social networks.
The company officially accepts employees into the program, informs them about its goals and objectives, and encourages them to place original content that demonstrates their stories as employees, the use of Adobe products and participation in Adobe campaigns to give social impact.
The company offers eye and online training that help to master the skills of influence on the Internet, as well as selects its own content for social networks that participants are used to accommodate directly in their tapes. In the end, the company stimulates the placement of posts on social networks with the help of so -called "funny awards". These promotions are "small incentives" and can take into account an extra output, a pizza party or a praise article in the company magazine.
Such programs greatly expand the social coverage and impact of the company. It has been estimated that in seven years about 200 employees' support programs have provided more than 13 million clicks on social networks. According to Forbes, such clicks would cost more than $ 57 million on the Internet. According to other studies, employees can generate 561% more coverage than branded channels of the company. In addition, it is believed that such programs help companies attract new employees.
Adobe is not a US armed forces. However, there are some basic similarities: both organizations hope to attract the best experts, so bringing their ideas to potential employees is critical. Both organizations seek to form a reliable reputation among key customers. For Adobe, this is manifested in sales and market investments. For the US military, this can be expressed in improving relations with the US public or improving communications during emergency surgery.
In addition to the similarity of communication goals, Adobe support programs and other corporations are a model where the military can learn how a large organization effectively uses the activity of their employees on social networks. For a number of reasons, the US military will benefit from such a program. First, in peacetime, this opportunity will become a tool for recruiting. Almost 70% of servicemen say they are satisfied with their work.
Many can also tell amazing stories, starting with trials and successes in a training camp and ending with training, business trips and trips abroad. The armed forces are already coming to young people who are familiar with social networks, and the proper use of this potential can significantly increase the number of young Americans whose tapes appear positive content related to military themes. Such content can affect American youth, which is considering their next career step.
Secondly, this potential will be crucial during emergency operations and deployment. Images and history of humanitarian operations can tell about generous US assistance, photos from the advanced convincingly refute the misinformation operations of the enemy. As in Ukraine, social networks will help to help maintain the support of the international community, document the enemy's war crimes and demonstrate success on the battlefield. The military does not see this opportunity yet.
The article in Defense One states that psychological operations now use "Synthetic Internet Opportunities and Real Model Analysis to Learning High Information Distribution District Learning. " But the article does not mention that the soldiers themselves use social networks. And at least once, when the military still used social networks, everything was not very good.
Meta has recently deleted three dozen Facebook accounts and two dozen Instagram accounts that were connected with the military and used to promote US interests abroad. Fake accounts were ineffective and did not become widespread and influence. The military also does not encourage the active use of social networks by their staff.
The recently adopted army policy on social networks has imposed restrictions on the use of new platforms and those that can use official army accounts, causing confusion about whether military personnel can mention their affiliation with the army in personal accounts. The US Army offers social media courses, but in the descriptions of these initiatives, social media is more dangerous than opportunity.
The trainings consider the "left and right limits" of using social networks, influenches in Tiktok receive a warning that they can "quickly bring them to trouble" and learn to "avoid fraud". These are important lessons. Social networks are dangerous. I think about the dangers every time I am published. But at the same time, they give the opportunity to communicate more actively and convincingly with the wide sections of the US community, given the potential recruits.
It may be important for the military to think about encouraging the type and volume of content that can achieve these goals and do so that it also meets the important goals of war. For this purpose, the military could take the lessons of Ukraine and the practice of marketing. How can it be in practice? First, there are obvious restrictions.
It would be unreasonable to give every soldier, a sailor, a pilot or an iPhone Marine infantry and urge them to take direct broadcasts in a tweeter from their work or any important military operation. The use of social networks in the army can be associated with dangers and risks. Soldiers should not issue their location on the battlefield by specifying geomites, nor, as happened to Russian troops, creating large clusters of e -signatures around the camp.
The height of the battle is also not the best time to take a photo or check the number of likes on a recent message. And you probably do not want some dissatisfied pilot to act as a command or department. Effective programs can reduce these risks by careful selection of propagandists, as well as the development, training and application of "interaction rules" that dictate when and how content can be placed.
Wide rules that give enough space for authentic and spontaneous messages on social networks can also determine the types of content that staff should not place. The military can actively monitor the activity of their ambassadors on social networks to ensure compliance with the rules. You can use software already developed to help business track and evaluate the impact of publications on social networks that employees placed.
Starting from the small, the military should recruit the initial staff who are actively working on social networks. The military could teach them the established policies and new rules that dictate the types of content that can be shared, and, of course, the types of content that cannot be shared. Both eye and online trainings should be developed to help the staff to use their social networks as efficiently as possible.
And, like Adobe, you can define ways to encourage and reward those employees who are actively telling their stories on the Internet. The Ministry of Defense and individual services will measure the efficiency of such efforts and, of course, determine any related risks. The military may also think of what the presence on social networks looks like during military emergencies.
Working with NGOs, the Ministry of Defense and individual services can identify the types of content that will support different types of operations, recognize the concomitant risks of tactical posts and identify the rules and restrictions that inflensers can be guided. With the doctrine in their hands, the military train as they intend to fight.
In the course of educational measures and training, the military can be determined by personnel authorized to place content and then integrate a model of social networks into exercises. After the exercises, it will be possible to understand whether the content created has contributed to achieving the goals of training in public relations. There is a risk that a soldier, for example, will have a bad day in the office or field, and he will tell his subscribers on the Internet.
This remains risk even without a formal propaganda program. But the propaganda program is designed to help manage the risks, partially forming the spread of more positive content. In this case, the essence is authenticity and it is impossible to ensure the authenticity of positive content if the staff cannot publish their criticism or express dissatisfaction. Therefore, there is a rule that if someone had a bad day, it may well share problems, and it only adds trust in other positive materials.
I already imagine how these recommendations are horrified by a typical officer in public relations. The military is accustomed to strictly control their messages, and such a program partially cancels this control. However, in the new epic, it may take something more than just a thin stream of carefully verified communications department with the public. The development of authenticity of content and inflooener can be a good beginning.