I am lying

By this point, you should have heard of the new hit spin-off from the Department of Defense (formerly called the War Department) called the Office of Strategic Influence. As reported in the New York Times in Pentagon Readies Efforts to Sway Sentiment Abroad, this office would be in charge of:

<q> … developing plans to provide news items, possibly even false ones, to foreign media organizations as part of a new effort to influence public sentiment and policy makers in both friendly and unfriendly countries … The small but well-financed Pentagon office, which was established shortly after the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks, was a response to concerns in the administration that the United States was losing public support overseas for its war on terrorism, particularly in Islamic countries.</q>

The Washington Post is also reporting in Defense Dept. Divided Over Propaganda Plan that:

<q>The military has long tried to influence public opinion in countries at war under the title of “psychological operations.” But the new office apparently plans to extend such operations into nations in which the United States is not a combatant.</q>

The response to this has been somewhat negative, as Americans prefer to think of themselves as truthful at all times and not in need of twisting their message in order to sell it. Ahem. Others gut-laughed because the CIA seems to have changed its name to be more politically correct, a la Philip Morris -> Altria Group. There is also concern that some of the “black” (false) information would trickle into allied nations and possibly even the U.S. That would be terrible if it ever happened. I think I hear more gut-laughing.

In reponse to those concerns, New York Newsday is reporting in It’s Right to Put Kibosh on Disinformation that:

<q>Secretary Donald Rumsfeld’s pledge that the Defense Department would tell only the truth in seeking to influence public opinion overseas is a welcome answer to the controversy over the role of Defense’s new Office of Strategic Influence. Rumsfeld’s statement was necessary because the press had reported some unnamed subordinates declaring that “false” or “black” news would be used along with the “white” news or truth.</q>

Thank goodness. That puts a stop to those concerns. As the columnist, Leonard Sussman writes further:

<q>Rumsfeld’s rejection of disinformation is in the national interest. There must be a clear separation between the very limited permissible use of false propaganda for a tactical military purpose and a broad, year-round strategy of truth-telling as persuasion.</q>

Leonard, you just swallowed the first official piece of disinformation put out by the Office of Strategic Influence. Congratulations. There’s probably a lot of high-fiving going on there right now. He does go on to provide some decent history of U.S. disinformation campaigns, though.

AlterNet weighs in with some possible Headlines from the Office of Strategic Influence culled from news around the world. David Corn, also on AlterNet has Office of Strategic Lying? with a hypothetical conversation between Rumsfeld and a subordinate, “Johnson”, discussing the creation of the Office.

Plastic points out another New York Times article, called Pentagon May Eliminate New Office of Influence.

<q> … Mr. Bush, who spoke to reporters during a photography session at the White House, was asked if he had told Mr. Rumsfeld to scrap the agency. “I didn’t even need to tell him this,” Mr. Bush replied. “He knows how I feel about this.”</q>