I was planning a post for today called “I was Wrong” in reference to my post from a week ago, “Dealing with a Democratizing World.” In that post I said,
The State Department has a Facebook page, a YouTube account, and a blog. We’re busily engaged in trying to create “virtual presence posts” for important cities that lack a US diplomatic presence. Still, I can’t help but feel like we’re not getting it. There’s just too much bureaucracy to make the kind of personal contact needed for social media. We’re just too McCain and not enough Obama.
Secretary Clinton has honestly surprised me with her candor and interactions with everyday people during this Asia trip. I was planning to say so today; since I’m not, I refer you to Patricia Lee Sharpe’s phenomenal article that covers it. In other words, I think Clinton gets dealing with a democratizing world, but then I got to work today.
Today I read that I had missed a cable that went out to all diplomatic and consular channels entitled, “Social Media and the Conduct of Diplomacy.” The cable starts off by defending the Department’s web 2.0 efforts, and then reminds personnel that, “Department personnel must publicly defend U.S. government policy, despite any personal reservations,” and, “any posting to a wiki or blog that contains information ‘of official concern’ to the Department must be cleared through PA (for domestic employees) or Chief of Mission.” I looked up a definition of “of official concern” and found “materials are on matters of official concern if they relate to any policy, program, or operation of the employee’s agency or to current U.S. foreign policies.” In other words, anything about the Department or about US foreign affairs is off limits without clearance.
Why I Started Blogging
I love the Foreign Service. There are two downsides to it, however, that I thought blogging might help.
- In the Foreign Service it’s easy to get caught up in one region or with one aspect of your current job, and lose sight of the big picture of international relations.
- Frankly, I left my friends and family back home, and have found that I spend a lot of money entertaining myself in my otherwise empty evenings, and though blogging would be a cheap, interesting thing spend my time doing.
It’s ironic that this cable was sent out exactly one month after the inauguration of a President who has so clearly mastered these means of communication.
(I know this is probably simple paranoia [life the in the Foreign Service can make you paranoid], but I can’t help but feel that less than a week after I questioned the department’s mastery of social media, a cable is released by the people in charge of social media that first defends its track record and then attacks private blogs about foreign affairs. I can’t matter that much, and it would take longer than a week to get out a response, right? What’s more, Secretary Clinton basically said the same thing at her town hall meeting… maybe the cable is in response to her comments?)
Decisions, Decisions
In any case, as I see it, I now have a few options:
- Blog about things not ‘of official concern’ like other countries’ foreign policies (nice loophole, right?). Unfortunately, I just know more about my country’s policies, and, frankly, if I didn’t talk about US policies, how could I possibly call this blog The Hegemonist? I suppose I could also blog about US domestic politics, but I find that boring.
- I can quit blogging, and go back to being a normal schmuck (as opposed to a blogging schmuck). The problem is that I really enjoy blogging. I enjoy meeting people with similar interests and interesting ideas and being able to air out my ideas a bit.
- I could try submitting all of my posts for official clearance. Something makes me think this option just isn’t workable.
- I can try and get the policy changed. The State Department has a dissent channel, and I hear it isn’t too difficult to get a well written article in the Foreign Service Journal. The problem here is that I couldn’t do it anonymously. There’s no going back, and I don’t know that a hobby is worth putting my career in jeopardy.
- I can keep doing what I’m doing, blogging anonymously. This seems slightly irresponsible to me, however. I mean, if a policy is wrong, shouldn’t I try to change it instead of just disobeying it? That seems like simple civics.
Feel Free to Offer Opinions
I’m probably going to take the rest of the week off to try and figure out what I want to do with this blog. Do other FS bloggers clear their work? What do other FSOs think about all of this? Are they normal, bureaucratic CYA policies, that aren’t enforced/enforceable? Have I crossed any lines by thinking out loud about Department/foreign policies? I’m really anxious to get other FSOs opinions about this, because I think they know Department culture somewhat better than others. On the other hand, I’m curious what my other readers think, about what I should do with this blog if it isn’t about things ‘of official concern.’ I can’t promise to do what you suggest, but I’m always open to suggestions. Feel free to contact me directly if you don’t feel comfortable using the comments. I promise to keep you informed of any decisions I make as I make them, I hate those blogs that just stop one day, and don’t want to become one of them.
{ 1 trackback }
{ 23 comments… read them below or add one }
I think the Department’s policy is impermissibly infringing your 1st amendment rights.
I suppose you could officially challenge the policy. That seems dangerous for someone so early in their career. Will more senior blogges stand up to the policy?
And, you’re pretty careful in what you say. It’s not like you are divulging goverment secrets–you’re talking about our country. It’s silly to think I can sit here in the US and do it, but you can’t, because you are an FSO.
So, that leaves civil disobedience.
It all comes down to what you’re comfortable with.
I’d say restart a different blog. Instead of directly saying that you are an FSO, say that you are a foreign affairs professional living abroad. Then, you can say whatever you want and not be considered a representative of the US government.
The challenge then would be retaining the credibility of your blo if you were just another expat blogging about his experiences. But if you write consistently quality posts the audience will come eventually as long as you comment on other blogs.
So don’t stop blogging and don’t get your posts cleared, but I could see how it frustrates State Dept officials knowing their own employees are using their title as FSO to put forth their own policies on the web anonymously.
By anonymous. Just don’t be an anonymous FSO.
The pattern I notice among the approximately 100 FS blogs I have on my blogroll is that people either only talk about their families or they remain anonymous. Like you, I have chosen the latter option. I generally stay clear of discussing foreign policy because I know that we are required to support it when we are overseas. That said, I don’t kid myself…I know my blog contains postings that would be considered of “official concern.” In fact, I went anonymous after being warned twice about my blog (and on some issues I saw their point and sanitized some postings).
I don’t (and won’t) get it cleared. There is no way to do that and have timely entries. And I won’t make it sound like I am something other than an FSO, because then I would lose my credibility.
My two cents is to do what you do just like you are now. The Department is a split on blogs…PD loves them, DS hates them, and the cable no doubt is part of the battle.
You need to form some sort of ‘union’ with all the FS bloggers. Power comes in numbers you can probably remain anonymous by being in a large group. Either petition them or take some other proactive measure to bring change. Good luck.
TH
I just wrote a piece on dissent - one of those linked articles talked about ambassadors not really suffering from the consequences of their dissenting opinions. I thought, well, that’s probably because they have been in long enough, they know others who are willing to — if not defend them, at least run interference so their careers are not derailed. The stats for entry level officers surviving it were not very good. So that’s something to keep in mind.
TSB at the Skeptical Bureaucrat has considered the “official concern” angle and doesn’t even mention where he works anymore. For now while you’re considering your options, use an IP blocker or anonymizer so you can’t be easily traced by your IP address.
I’ve been thinking about writing something about this outdated policy… it does not apply to me but it does not make sense…
take care
Tracking someones IP address? Going through clearance? Civil Disobedience? Bloggers union?
This is getting way to complicated.
Seriously, just continue blogging but don’t tell your readers that you work for the State Department. It’s not that hard. You may lose some credibility but like I said: if you are writing legitimate posts, you will gain respect eventually.
There are a ton of foreign policy blogs out there. It would be a shame if we couldn’t get one with an insider’s perspective. Just stay away from anything work related.
Free speech is what makes America great. But at the same time you can’t use your taxpayer funded title to criticize elected leaders. Instead, just comment but don’t tell us you’re an FSO. Simple.
Credibility matters.
It matters to the readers, because there are billions of web sites and only a few have good information. If I didn’t know straight off that this was written by an FSO I wouldn’t have returned.
4+5 is what I would advocate, granted I’m not an FSO so can’t fully evaluate the consequences.
If State has to or chooses to stifle backchannel dissent, its PD2.0 policy is failing.
I thought about this problem a while ago and decided that I am comfortable blogging about “matters of official concern” if those matters are already in the public sphere, especially if the U.S. government has put them there itself. If an official spokesman, or website, publication, congressional testimony, etc., has made a matter public, I’ll take that as official clearance to notice and discuss it.
I do not submit blog materials for review, because that simply wouldn’t be practical. I don’t think the Department really wants them to be submitted anyway, or else PA and Chiefs of Mission would have little time to do anything except review them, since there are about 100 active DOS blogs plus who knows how many Facebook pages. The whole policy on official clearance of employee’s private speaking or writing, which was published in 2005, is outdated and in need of review itself.
Were I in your place I’d continue thinking out loud about U.S. foreign policy, just as any citizen may do. If there is a line that shouldn’t be crossed, I’d say it’s the point where you would be discussing official information that isn’t already in the public domain. Good luck.
I hope you keep blogging and do not let this hinder you in any way. The State Dept. should be encouraging you to do this!
I can’t think of a better way for American government to express itself better. Right now, they’re losing the PR battle in public opinion in my judgment - though I suppose the Obama Crazy Train will diffuse this somewhat. But overall, it’s still there.
Tough call. I say stick with it. One less voice is one less for freedom of speech. There are ways around it like Mark suggested.
But this stuff happens all the time. Luckily, the bank I worked for a few years ago (for 10 years) didn’t bother me but I worked for a bunch of kids doing web copy who figured out a recipe to make serious cash scamming people (I only figured this out three months and decided I’d seen enough) anyway they were MONITORING MY BLOG and even called me into the office asking about some of the posts and probing me. They even went as far as to tell me what not to post!
I wanted to slug the twit.
I couldn’t what I was witnessing. Anyway, I simply changed my writing when it came to the stuff they were paranoid about - needless to say, given their reading skills, it didn’t take much to wipe them clean. That reminds me…this gives me an idea for a post.
Sorry for the grammar.
“I couldn’t believe…” Forgot to insert that in.
I hear you. :)
I’m a Peace Corps Volunteer and a blogger. Not many years ago, that combination could get you shipped home; these days, PC allows blogging, and even publicizes them through peacecorpsjournals.com…but the price is that we’re required to tell Peace Corps the address of our blog, we can’t be remotely critical of our host countries, and we can’t give details like city names. (The last one is for security reasons, they tell us - apparently there are terrorists who would like to target Peace Corps Volunteers.)
I’ve adapted to these restrictions, and even gone so far as to avoid using real names, instead refering to my PC friends by their adopted Moroccan names. My own name, email address, etc, do not appear anywhere in the blog.
I’d say, try to work within the system for now, and write about non-political aspects of life as a FSO…and at the same time, do what you can to get the policy changed. Why not send something into the Foreign Service Journal? You can oppose the policy without claiming authorship of The Hegemonist.
-innocentablogged.blogspot.com
I’ve always felt encouraged when reading your blog. I don’t think you’ve written anything that would cross the line, and when you did talk about controversial topics, you’ve approached them delicately. I hope you’ll continue to write as you have been.
Do what you feel is right. So far, yu’ve maintained your anonymity and haven’t said anything against US policy or the Department, so no one’s going to come hunting anytime soon.
I look forward to continued insight.
Keep on Bloggin!
The cable you saw is an annual iteration of a policy that has always been there. It is not intended to stifle free speech. It is intended to prevent State Department employees from saying things which would endanger the mission of the Department/hamper sensitive negotiations/become politically problematic.
Do not blog on the foreign policy issues of the day.
Do not pretend, ever, to speak for the Department.
Do not write about things that you are privy to as a consequence of your position.
Do not go anywhere near anything classified.
Post a disclaimer making it clear you do not speak for the Department.
And Keep On Bloggin.
I’ve linked back to you here: http://consul-at-arms2.blogspot.com/2009/02/re-tough-decisions.html
What’s the point of blogging if not on the foreign policy issues of the day? Everything is connected to FP some way or the other.
There’s a difference between posting criticisms about USG policy and merely talking about USG policy, but I read the cable as banning both of them. Since just about everyone who reads my blog knows me personally, I can’t use the fig leaf of not mentioning that I’m an FSO, per Mark’s suggestion. As for where I’m posted, there is no reason why I’d be here if it weren’t for official purposes - I can’t not mention what I do, because it makes no sense otherwise.
When I read this cable, I was pretty depressed at how out-of-touch its writer sounds. I’m waiting on the day that someone scolds us for listing our political preferences on Facebook or the like. Forgive me for sounding like a fresh-faced naïf, but I can just imagine some codgy old DAS sitting at Cable Express, shaking his/her fist at those meddling bloggers.
I don’t have much hope that anything will change soon, though. I love my job, and I absolutely appreciate having a good job when every single member of my grad school cohort is unemployed or working at a coffee shop right now, but when confronted with bizarre restrictions such as this, I start to daydream about other jobs. I’ve been blogging for eight years now, and I don’t see that my job should dictate how I communicate with friends who live on other continents.
An ironic aside: one of my A100 coordinators has been blogging for years, yet this was conveniently not mentioned during that part of A100 when we were admonished not to blog, ever. Way to go, State.
The A-100 orientation staff and the CDO advice is full of bs.
Either way, I have a blog for 3 years, and have been at state for more than a year. I have never mentioned my job and have been vague about where I am. I write about foreign affairs from a general interest perspective, usually in the context of evolutionary psychology and other topics under the sun.
It’s one way to go about it.
I like the gist of Steve’s comment:
“Keep on Bloggin!”
Along with his practical advice:
“Do not blog on the foreign policy issues of the day.” [there are plenty of other topics in the diplomatic world]
“Do not pretend to speak for the Department.” [that would make it a paler version of official speak]
“Do not write about things that you are privy to as a consequence of your position.” [that's only fair]
“Do not go anywhere near anything classified.”['nuff said]
“Post a disclaimer making it clear you do not speak for the Department.” [again, why would you try to be son-of-Dipnote?]
All very good advice, much of which you are probably following anyway.
I read your reasons for blogging, and find them honorable. I believe that the Department would lose a considerable “free” resource, a multiplier of diplomatic voices, were it to stifle blogs by FSOs.
Steve’s good advice should help you and other FS bloggers avoid problems with the stiflers.
By all means, “Keep on Blogging!”
Just stumbled across this older post. Thanks so much for writing it, and getting the ball rolling on the discussion. If this issue underscores anything, it is the need for more nuanced, sophisticated guidance on this subject.
In the runup to the 2008 presidential election, I was pretty stunned to see such blatantly partisan postings on Facebook pages of FSO friends. Since, particularly during the last administration, DOS unfairly took fire for being the “fifth column” for offering dissenting views on Iraq and other issues, overt politicization of one’s Facebook page didn’t seem like a fabulous idea to me. I actually asked AFSA about it, curious as to whether any specific guidance with regard to social networking sites was forthcoming. The answer I got was this: younger officers, especially, feel very strongly about their right to express themselves on private web pages. With regard to Facebook, you generally have to be a friend to read the content, so that makes it okay.
Well, that makes it okay if your privacy settings are correctly configured.
It’d seem to be that it wouldn’t take a technological wizard to compile a list of FSOs with webpages, be able to gain access to content, and then start using that information for malicious political purposes. If you can imagine a ambitious congressional staffer looking to make his mark doing something like this, then it’ll likely happen eventually.
Our blogs are anonymous. Most I’ve seen from FSOs are careful to frame a discussion about policy issues without criticizing U.S. policy. I know that’s what I try to do on my infant blog!
I think any policy that attempts to quash the incredibly insightful discussions I see develop on just a fascinating array of topics instead of embracing this medium and making it work for us is sadly, profoundly misguided.
Hi there, If you don’t like topics with many links, just delete this topic.
Thankyou.
As that very A100 coordinator who’d been “blogging for years”, I take serious exception to the fact that the stated policy was “not to blog, ever”. Training new staff on the expectations of an antiquated bureaucracy is difficult, especially in light of the incredibly bad judgment some A100 bloggers show. The A100 team had multiple arguments about how to discuss blogging and, unfortunately, not one person gave the message (it’s okay as long as you don’t compromise the USG) the same way. How the message is interpreted by each individual is another matter entirely. Blog if you want to. Just be prepared for consequences meted out by people who do not want to understand.