Wag the dog anyone?
Time to revisit one of our favorite subjects, namely how information is being managed by others to dictate our perception of the situation. Think such a thing is not possible, then it is time to reexamine the dark arts of ‘perception management’.
How much of the information presented to you as expert analysis, is actually nothing of the sort? Are facts being manipulated so as to guide you to a conclusion that is on someone else’s agenda? How much of what you read is actual and how much perception? Without wanting to appear a conspirasist nut, on many issues one could easily see how the use of ‘Perception Management’ campaigns could be at the root of the confusion. The art of Perception Management is not science fiction, it firmly based in fact and is referenced quite openly in the US Department of Defense handbooks. The Defense Department defines Perception Management as:
Actions to convey and/or deny selected information and indicators to foreign audiences to influence their emotions, motives, and objective reasoning as well as to intelligence systems and leaders at all levels to influence official estimates, ultimately resulting in foreign behaviors and official actions favorable to the originator’s objectives. In various ways, perception management combines truth projection, operations security, cover and deception, and psychological operations.
To quote others on the issue, “…the phrase “perception management” has often functioned as a “euphemism” for “an aspect of information warfare.” A scholar in the field notes a distinction between “perception management” and public diplomacy, which “does not, as a rule, involve falsehood and deception, whereas these are important ingredients of perception management; the purpose is to get the other side to believe what one wishes it to believe, whatever the truth may be.” In relation many issues, take the opacity around Iran and its nuclear objectives as just one example, there definitely is a potential for such techniques to be in play. Perception management has various elements to its usage, and many degrees of application. For example, the embedded reporters in the second Iraq War, according to some commentators, were not placed there so as to report the facts alone, but also so that the Pentagon could manage the press agenda by deciding where and how to deploy those troops with reporters attached.
There is a fascinating report on the use of perception management in the Iraq War over at the blog, Violet Planet. The author using an Associated Press article, “Media, Pentagon Spar Over Control of Information” as his starting point, posts the following:
The black-and-white video starts with a mini-van locked in the crosshairs and the sound of a missile launching. A ball of fire suddenly consumes the van and a palm grove somewhere in Iraq. “Good shot,” says a voice squawking over what sounds like a military radio. Before the one-minute video clip is over, two more SUVs are destroyed by Apache helicopters. The video is one of dozens brought to viewers around the world by Maj. Alayne Conway, the top public affairs officer for the 3rd Infantry Division. When her unit was in Iraq, her office sent out four to six videos a day to media outlets around the world, as well as posting them on YouTube. “You want to make sure you edit it in the right way,” Conway said. “You have to go through the steps. … Is this something that is going to make Joe Six-Pack look up from his TV dinner or his fast-food meal and look up at the TV and say, `Wow, the American troops are kicking butt in Iraq?’”
If you start to research the possible and theoretical extent of Perception Management, it is a scary concept. There are firms out there that specialize in its application, and who ply their trade to both Government and private sector clients. There are ‘bear traps’ that these firms construct – these are Internet sites which espouse views contrary to the mainstream opinion. The idea is that these are harder to find, attract more dedicated researchers and reporters, so allow the sponsor to ‘trap’ the IP addresses of those who might mount an opposition to the agenda being ‘managed’. Any reporters researching contrary positions are identified, tracked, and can be controlled through ’snark’ comments or public ridicule of their position. Then there are also ‘honey traps’ preaching a party line to attract those who just need to be shown the issue through an agenda view to then take that position and go out to repeat it online in blogs and commentaries. By the use of these and other such techniques online opinion management can be effected.
How extensive the application of Perception Management, how extreme the manipulation, or how widespread the use is anybody’s guess. However, it makes the requirement to remain courageous and objective in one’s research and writing even more important. There is a requirement for the more informed reader to go deeper than the headlines, absorb the blogs and opinion pieces, but not necessarily take the ‘facts’ as given as self-evident truths just because they are so written. In a complex global world, certainty is always suspect. It is easy to demonstrate how extreme and one-eyed the coverage of contentious issues can be . Why don’t some isssues hit the mainstream press, is often a complaint of activists on forgotten issues? It is because it doesn’t necessarily fit with the picture that some want you to have of the world. To be an informed observer, you need to research, be objective and be prepared to reject the agendas presented to you. That has always been the editorial policy of of own publication. However, maybe this site is just another ‘bear trap’ set out there as a bait. That is the essence of the ‘Perception Managenment’ problem, you never know when or if you being lied to or led to a conclusion, and that is a scary proposition.
