BOB GARFIELD:
This is On the Media. I'm Bob Garfield.
BROOKE GLADSTONE:
And I'm Brooke Gladstone. When Jason Hartley was a soldier in Iraq, he was also a blogger, documenting his life in the Army. An entry on his website from November 13, 2003, reads, quote: "There's a darkly intoxicating aspect to this kind of thing. I'm over-armed with my rifle and grenade launcher and the veritable ammunition dump that is the vest over my body armor. I can see how the bully feels, how one could grow fond of this darkly amusing massive imbalance of power."

Eventually, Hartley ran afoul of the Army's vaguely-worded Operational Security – or OPSEC – regulations that govern what soldiers can express in a public forum. His blog, Justanothersoldier.com, was shut down.

This weekend, the second annual Conference of Military Bloggers is buzzing about a new regulation, written by Army Major Ray Ceralde, that appears to restrict bloggers more than ever. A year ago, at the MilBlogger's first conference in Washington, former paratrooper and current blogger Matthew Burden had this to say, quote: "If the Army restricts bloggers, all you will have are pissed-off dissident bloggers who are willing to take a risk, and all of the guys in this room who are trying to get the stories out will not. That'll be the end."
MATTHEW BURDEN:
As a former military officer, it's a very difficult issue for me to have to say that this is a wrong piece of regulation, that they're out of their minds with what they're trying to do. The old regulation was that if a soldier believed that he had information that might be an operational security risk, he needed to have his commander or operational security officer review that information before he published it. And by publish it, that means post it to a blog or website.

And in 2007, the big difference is that every post needs to be reviewed by the commander or the operational security officer. So if I was going to say I had a really fantastic meatball sandwich [LAUGHS] –in the mess facility at FOB Speicher in Iraq, he's got to read it and say, yeah, that's okay. You can put that up on the blog.
BROOKE GLADSTONE:
Now, the kind of response we've heard from the military thus far is that, look, you know, it may say that, but it's really up to the commanding officers' discretion, and they're not going to want to know about your meatball sandwich in the mess.
MATTHEW BURDEN:
Well, for all your listeners that are out there that have ever served in the military, they're going to know that that's a pretty false statement. I've [LAUGHS] never known a commander to take a liberal interpretation of Army regulations.

The intent is to basically reduce the amount of information that gets published that could be a risk, and I think I would submit that it's probably going to have the opposite effect.
BROOKE GLADSTONE:
Why will it have the exact opposite effect?
MATTHEW BURDEN:
All right, let's say there's 1,400 military bloggers now, of which probably 3 are flying under the radar, posting information that would probably be detrimental to the mission or would be negative about their chain of command. Now you're going to have 1,397 less military bloggers, and those three voices that used to be maybe drowned out in the noise of, you know, the pride that these other soldiers had of what they're doing, they're going to be the sole ones left. They have the stage, so to speak.
BROOKE GLADSTONE:
Because they won't care about breaking these regulations?
MATTHEW BURDEN:
Right. They're not going to care if they get punished.
BROOKE GLADSTONE:
Do you know of any cases where a MilBlogger has unintentionally divulged sensitive information?
MATTHEW BURDEN:
There was a bombing outside of Mosul in a dining facility. It was a suitcase bomb. And there were three bloggers that witnessed the event, and one was a doctor. And he wrote about the damage that was done. A chaplain wrote about the effects on the base, and another soldier wrote about it.

Now, separately these items may not give the enemy enough information to understand how much damage they caused. And what we want to deny the enemy is called battle damage assessment, or BDA. Unfortunately, when you piece all the information from three separate blogs that have three separate chain of commands, in aggregate the enemy might be able to piece something together.

You know, I would really like to see the Army institute military blogging with the same rules that embed reporters have. Embed reporters are not allowed to give away key information. Geraldo Rivera was bounced out of the war zone for giving away the 101st location during an attack, during the invasion in 2003.

And I think that if they give them the same rules as embed reporters, you know, with Uniform Code of Military Justice issues still intact, you could work something out.
BROOKE GLADSTONE:
Now, you've worked at intelligence during your time in the Army, and you certainly understand the need for operational security. Is this simply a case of loose lips sinks ships taken too far? I mean, why these restrictions and why now?
MATTHEW BURDEN:
Well, it's a control issue. I think right now – and you probably won't get this from the Department of Defense – you've got some officers that don't understand Web 2.0 and podcasts, webcasts. They're aghast at that. I know General Cody, who originally wrote the regulation to basically squelch blogging, was immediately concerned about the operational security issue. And it is a valid concern. I believe al Qaeda's reading military blogs. Absolutely.

On the other side of the coin, you often hear about how the American population is disconnected from the military. Well, military blogs offer you that connection. They can give you the feeling of who are these people that are serving our nation, and what are they doing, and why are they proud of what they're doing? And that's going to be lost. That'll be silenced. And I think that's a shame.
BROOKE GLADSTONE:
Thank you very much.
MATTHEW BURDEN:
Thanks, Brooke.
BROOKE GLADSTONE:
Matthew Burden blogs under the name Blackfive at Blackfive.net. He is the author and editor of The Blog of War, a compilation of many military blogs, several of which have had to close down because of government regulation.

Major Ray Ceralde is the author of Army Regulation 530-1: Operation Security. Welcome to the show.
RAY CERALDE:
Thank you.
BROOKE GLADSTONE:
So we just spoke to a MilBlogger and a former paratrooper, Matthew Burden.
RAY CERALDE:
Yes.
BROOKE GLADSTONE:
He says – and I quote from his blog – that "operational security is of paramount importance, but we are losing the information war on all fronts. Fanatic-like adherence to OPSEC will do us little good if we lose the few honest voices that tell the truth about the long war."
RAY CERALDE:
You know, I understand his concern. And what this regulation is trying to do is strike a balance with that. The Army respects every soldier's First Amendment rights, but we also have to adhere to operation security considerations.

Some of the bloggers are concerned that every posting, every blog entry that they make has to be cleared. No. That is not true. That is not the intent here of this regulation.
BROOKE GLADSTONE:
I'm sure it's not the intent of the regulation, but I have it in front of me, and it explicitly states that the kind of oversight that it demands is the responsibility of every commanding officer.
RAY CERALDE:
What it specifically says is that for all Army personnel – in this case, like soldiers – for them to consult with their immediate supervisor and their OPSEC officer for an OPSEC review prior to posting or publishing in a public forum.
BROOKE GLADSTONE:
But if the commanding officer is responsible for overseeing everything posted in a public forum, that means every blog posting, even as Matthew Burden told us, if he had had a really good meatball sandwich in the mess that day.
RAY CERALDE:
No. Well, that's not what we're – that's not -
BROOKE GLADSTONE:
I understand that's not the intention, but that is what is stated in the regulation.
RAY CERALDE:
Right. And, I mean, I understand this is blog posting, and that's what I'm trying to clarify here. We respect soldiers' rights to express themselves. And, no, that's not the intent here that every posting is, you know, every entry, I should say, is to be reviewed prior to being published. No. And, you know, perhaps a better term should have been – instead of using "postings" it could just be a blog, you know, initially when it's established. But, no, that's not the intent.
BROOKE GLADSTONE:
Thank you very much.
RAY CERALDE:
You're welcome.
BROOKE GLADSTONE:
Major Ray Ceralde is the author of Army Regulation 530-1. He spoke to us from the Pentagon.