It may not be possible for the US Government to contract for an external public relations agency to manage information warfare.  Whatever message they generate, it will have to be vetted by the military for approval.  Thus, that agency will still be perceived as "private" industry promoting government/military propaganda -- probably not something a private corporation would want to sign up for.  By involving themselves they may also become targets for opposing forces.   It is probably better for the military to keep management and execution of information operations/promoting their strategic message, rather than hand that mission to a civilian firm.  The military already has the capability to conduct information warfare, but contracting for advice on how to better craft their messages for a local region or take advantage of different media is possible.

@ chuckgregory

"If someone saw and saved a copy of your post before you removed it or edited it, you will be in just as much Cybertrouble as you would have been in real trouble in real life."

You have a valid point. It depends on how quickly you have edited or deleted your post after the initial posting. I, myself, do post a comment sometimes which I realize later that I should not have and usually in less than a minute I realize that it aint appropriate. The longer the duration before edition and more the controversial your comment is, the higher the chances are that someone will save it.

@WaqasAltaf

In a real-life conversation, you can take back your words, too, and if no one was listening you will get away with it. If someone saw and saved a copy of your post before you removed it or edited it, you will be in just as much Cybertrouble as you would have been in real trouble in real life.

Thanks for your thoughts.

@ chuckgregory

That's a very thoughtful message. Just like we dont express everything we feel so as to avoid consequences as far as everyday face to face conversations are concerned, we also decide not to express it on social media. Unlike real life conversations, you can take your words back unless you are editing something 1 week after posting it.

If, indeed, "Government is a reflection of society and can enrich society, if the citizens hold it responsible," then I'm all for it. The thing is, all too often government refuses responsibility even as it usurps authority, and the citizens are too apathetic or too afraid to stand up and denounce it for its actions.

Government certainly will expand the use of social media in its continued war against not only the other countries it calls enemies but even more against its undeclared target: us.

I'm pretty sure that Facebook does keep track of what our wall posts said before we edited them; most likely they aren't the only ones (can you say Homeland Insecurity?).

Being able to edit what's on your wall, or tweeting an edited version of your tweet, or in changing your position on a topic seem to me normal human responses. We say something in anger, we take it back later. Those listening may or may not choose to remember what we said. It may represent the difference between how we react and how we choose to present ourselves from the world, and both have some validity. Both are part of who we are.

@DavidSilversmith

I fundamentally agree with you, and feel you defend your position very eloquently.

My take is similar:
A government is only as good or bad as its citizens allow it to be.  Government is a reflection of society and can enrich society, if the citizens hold it responsible.

There's a fine line between propoganda and transparency when it comes to government operations.  Where the IDF lands on that line is open for debate, but I think the U.S. can use social media without abusing social media.

Wikileaks, et al. are always crying about lack of transparency regarding the U.S. Military and its operations.  So if social media information was truthful, how could critics call more information be a bad thing?

Just because your organization is strictly scrutinized does not mean you have an excuse for playing luddite.

@WaqasAltaf

In the U.S. laws against harassment/cyberbullying do exist in mutliple jurisidictions, though there's no formal federal law yet (a house bill H.R. 6123 has been proposed to fill that gap).

Now, certain kinds of harassment -- i.e. sexual harassment or harassment of government employees -- may fall under certain other workplace or anti-terrorism laws.

"Also, the good part about online messages on social media and mails are that they are there on record forever and the defendant cannot revert from his statement."

In theory, although even Facebook now allows edits of posts. ;)

@ DukeW

One thing you are right that the smartness counts on the social media and one should think about the far reaching impacts of the word before it is delivered. Being smart on social media however doesnt mean that you are on the right path.

IMO, Twitter has in recent times been dirtied by the political debates. Facebook and Google Plus have played safe (unintentionally) in this aspect.