(photos via instagram)
My brother is currently serving in Afghanistan with his Army National Guard unit. He has a small cult following on his various social feeds of people, like me, desperate to keep in contact with him. His most popular feed is probably through instagram where he posts photos of the various people he’s with, the things he is doing, and the places he’s seeing. It’s been great for those of us to miss him to be able to see him…well, let’s say semi-happy or partially okay with being where he is. But he’s gotten a fair amount of attention for it with his impeccable use of hashtags, trending topics, etc. And, as it turns out, he's gotten into a fair amount of trouble for it.
He couldn't post a photo of himself because he wasn't wearing a helmet. It's against the rules. And people are watching.
He was told his wife had to stop posting comments about missing him or needing him back or wishing things were different.
He was told to tell his mom, dad, friends, strangers, to stop posting "inflammatory" comments about politics, the army, or my brothers job or they would be deleted immediately.
So in one of the few ways of communicating with my brother, we've been limited. After all, my mom nor my sister-in-law are in the military, nor do they report to my brother's commander. Yet their expressions--of whatever--are being edited, deleted, and deemed inappropriate for my brother to allow on a social network. And I guess I can see their reasoning, I just wonder how they get such control over not only what my brother posts but what of other posts he is allowed to allow.
Now, this is not a political rant. I respect the military and I love my brothers (both of them, actually) for their willingness to serve. I don't find myself caring about the government being in my business--not when it comes to my brother and his instagram feed. This is not me hating on the powers that be. Not at all. I just wonder...who has the power to control social media on an individual level? Does it really come down to whatever your boss--whoever that may be--says? Even when it effects not only you but others? I mean, in a world of instant communication and connection, is it fair to dictate what can be said when and where? It's a digital-age-old question, I know, but it just got me wondering. My interaction with my brother has been forced to change. Public communication about what he is doing, for how long, and for what is now frowned upon. Is it understandable? Perhaps in this context, yes. After all, he's off doing who-knows-what and there's hundreds and thousands in danger. But what is so frightening about a global network when it comes to my brother's day-to-day life? Is it fair to limit communications in a world built on instant access? Can the right to say what you will, like what you will, or snap a photo of what you will be limited by whoever's in charge? Or is this age built so entirely on free expression and a global community that this has to change? I doubt there's a solution--people will always be grappling for power--but I just wonder.
Full Disclosure: I'm really not mad or frustrated, just curious. I really do love my country, its military, and the soldiers, I swear.
This reminds me of one of the question I had in Digital Culture about authority in the digital age. Who's in charge of this thing anyway? If the internet is regulated, who should regulate it?
ReplyDeleteThe government often tries to step in and fill that role, but does the internet redefine what can be regulated? "Is it fair to limit communications in a world built on instant access?" These questions prompt us to re-examine Constitutional and moral principles.
I agree that we should be curious about these issues; re-examination doesn't require condemnation, at least I hope it doesn't. I think it can help us draw lines in the sand and decide where we stand on human issues like authority, administration, regulation, the responsibilities of those who regulate, fairness, free speech, military exceptionalism, and so on.
Anyway, more later, and God bless you and your family for your sacrifices.
Who exactly was telling your family to settle down? That kind of irritates me. But, at the same time, military censorship is not a new thing. It's the telling his wife what not to say that bothers me.
ReplyDelete