In Iraq, the U.S. Military Needs to Tell Its Story Better

by Diane Farsetta — August 21, 2008 - 2:29pm
Share/Save Share this

Wounded Iraqi childThe U.S. military is in the process of hiring a public relations firm to help it carry out "information operations" in Iraq, "to counter insurgent misinformation tactics." An Army public affairs officer said the goal of the work is to communicate "with people in Iraq in as many ways [as] possible what we're trying to do to help them, and what we're trying to do to prevent people from using these ruthless roadside bombs that blow up people in streets, in schools, and mosques." The one-year contract may be extended for up to three years and cost up to $300 million. "Public affairs executives speaking on background said the contract has elicited a lot of attention from Washington agencies because of its potential size," reports PR Week, "but that firms with previous experience working in dangerous, high-security environments in Iraq -- such as Lincoln Group, The Rendon Group and MPRI -- would have an inside track on winning the bid."

Main Source: 
PR Week, August 21, 2008

Comments

Why not! What's another $300

Submitted by FranH on October 6, 2008 - 5:21pm.

Why not! What's another $300 million going down the sink?!

Your Misquote...

Submitted by matthew.morgan on August 27, 2008 - 11:51am.

In your abstract you quote, "An Army public affairs officer said the goal of the work is to communicate 'with people in Iraq in as many ways [as] possible what we're trying to do to help them, and what we're trying to do to prevent people from using these ruthless roadside bombs that blow up people in streets, in schools, and synagogues.'"

I was struck by the incredible stupidity of this Army officer in his ignorant use of the word "synagogue." Then I discovered the error was not his, but yours.

The actual quote from PR Week ends "... in streets, in schools and mosques, we find that a very important thing.”

I will give you the benefit of the doubt assume the misquote to be unintentional, but can't help but wonder how the word swap happened. Besides, why wouldn't you just cut and paste? A more skeptical person might conclude you have an agenda...

Correction

Submitted by Diane Farsetta on August 27, 2008 - 3:38pm.

Thanks for calling attention to our inadvertent misquote, which has been corrected.

By the way...

Submitted by Diane Farsetta on September 18, 2008 - 9:16am.

By the way, the original mis-quote was due to an error on PR Week's part. Their online story was corrected without any notice, but their Sept. 8 print issue carries a correction. (I knew I had double-checked that!)