Almost one hundred years ago, Vera Brittain wrote to her lover Roland,
“This is grand, but still it isn’t enough for this world, whatever it may be like ‘when we’re beyond the sun.’ The earthly and obvious part of me longs to see and touch you and realize you as tangible.” (pg. 174)
For Vera and Roland, letters, or “snail mail” was the only way for them to communicate with each other. days, weeks, months might go by before someone got a letter back. And this was the same story for all the other girlfriends, wives, mothers, fathers, daughters, and sons, who had family fighting in the war. During World War I, this was the only choice anyone had to stay in touch with their soldiers. But, today, that is not the case. Not only do we have e-mail, which can be sent and received in a matter of seconds, but we have skype, iChat, facebook, twitter and blogging. You would think that these would all be wonderful advances in our ways of communicating, being able to see your loved one, face to face can make such a difference versus seeing their words down on a piece of paper. But to some, these advances aren’t all that great. There’s a valid argument for both sides, I think at least. In a recent article by Federal Computer Week, Ali Manouchehri, a chief executive officer for MetroStar systems stated,
“Adversaries with poor intent can target federal workers by knowing their routine through following them through a social media outlet.”
Privacy would be a popular concern among government and military officials. You don’t want a soldier spilling information over a nationally read Twitter update. But does this mean we have to eliminate a soldiers use of any of these tools altogether? The defense department doesn’t think so. Although some services have banned these types of sites, they say they’re going to allow it for their soldiers and families to communicate. Personally, I think soldiers have the right to use what ever kind of communication they see fit, and, if they feel like writing something that might not be “okay” by their officials, so be it. It’s probably something people need to hear anyways.
Federal Computer Week Article
Defense to allow troops, family members to use social network sites
October 15, 2009 at 12:29 am |
I did not know that communication routes were a target for soldiers to be attacked or monitored by opponents. It would seem logical for them to get rid of these methods all together as to save themselves from uncertainty and danger. However is it worth the soldiers mental health to not allow them access to modes of communication that connects them to their loved ones back home. When the soldiers are out in the fields they are so tormented by what they experience they need a sense of normalcy which they can receive through talking with those they love. They need that outlet to rant about their terrible experiences, how much they hate the war and their willingness to fight. Or maybe they want to tell people of their good times with their comrades. It is also a way for soldiers to talk to strangers who encourage them and support their choice to fight for their country. It is uplifting for these soldiers who are risking their lives every day to defend their country to hear from people they have never met before but who believe in them and thank them for their braveness. Therefore the consequences of removing these modes of communication must be considered.
October 28, 2009 at 1:25 am |
[...] Comment 2 [...]
October 29, 2009 at 12:55 am |
I definitely agree with your conclusion on the issue. I think people are generally responsible and resilient and soldiers wouldn’t post anything that would jeopardize either their own life, or the lives of their fellow soldiers. Even though I agree, however, I completely understand the opposing argument to all of this expansive media and sympathize with it. It is a frightening thought that a soldier could completely put his life, or the military, in danger over something as insignificant as twitter.
October 29, 2009 at 3:01 am |
I wrote about a similar topic in one of my post and I must say that I agree with your point of view that soldiers should be allowed to communicate by any means available to them. It is really kind of ridiculous to say that soldiers who are fighting for the country may be subject to regulation in this sense. I can understand how concerns would arise. It is a very valid point that by having information on a person from their blogs and such can result in problems such as knowing officials whereabouts but in terms of the military personnel, i feel that they are already in harms way, for the most part, and restricting their ability to communicate with home does more harm than good. It is very important that our soldiers can use advancements in technology to feel closer at home while serving.
November 28, 2009 at 4:34 am |
[...] Comments Comment 1 [...]