Next week MountainRunner goes to UT Austin for #Connexions24
Two panels where I talk about information warfare & political warfare
I’ll be in Austin, TX, next week to attend and participate in the #Connexions24 conference called “Extreme in the Mainstream: Information Disorder, (Dis)engagement, & Digital (R)evolution.” I’m on two panels:
From Reactive to Proactive: The United States & Information Warfare
Who: Adam Sikes, Andrew Whiskeyman, and me. Moderated by Kevin Lentz.
When: Monday 18 March at 10:45 - 12:00 (CT / GMT-5)1
and
A World Wide Web: Countering Foreign Interference & Information Manipulation
Who: Zuzana Košková, Jess Dawson, Ekaterina Schulmann, and me. Moderated by Craig Scott.
When: Wednesday 20 March at 9:00 - 10:15 (CT / GMT-5)
The agenda is full of great speakers I look forward to hearing and learning from. The event, I’m told, will not be live-streamed, but videos of each panel will be on the event’s YT channel at https://www.youtube.com/@UTconnexions.
Last year, I presented as a giant floating head looming over Jeff Trimble, the moderator, and Nick Cull, the discussant. Traveling from Boston to Austin is easier than traveling from Europe, which is where I was then. While you could watch the video of that panel, called “The Good, the Bad, the Ugly” with Matt Armstrong, you are probably better off if you read my recent post here called “Our dysfunctional relationship with information warfare starts with leadership” (an audio/podcast version is here).
Attending or speaking at conferences hasn’t been my thing for a while. From my perspective, it was simply a waste of my time that could be better spent with family. For the events I was invited to speak at, the focus was nearly always on improving our reactions to adversarial activities. Years of witnessing, from the inside and outside of government, gaps between how we prioritize, resource, support, integrate, and even merely consider the informational component of policy, both ours and of our adversaries, radicalized me, so to speak. This is why I focus on the leadership element.
The solution isn’t just money, which we know since the “strategic communication” and information operations world of the Defense Department was flooded with cash earlier this century.
The solution isn’t just organizational, which we know by looking at various ill-supported or inherently marginal efforts over the years, including the Joint Information Operations Warfare Command/Center (JIOWC), the Counterterrorism Communication Center (CTCC), the Global Strategic Engagement Center (GSEC, which replaced CTCC), the Center for Strategic Counterterrorism Communication (CSCC, which replaced GSEC), the Global Engagement Center (GEC, which replaced GSEC), the Bureau of International Information Programs, the… oh, what’s the value of continuing the list.
The solution isn’t just a lack of legislative authorities (as in, what is legally permissible), which we know when pushing those making this claim to connect the legislative barrier to the denied action. Nearly always, the so-called barrier either didn’t exist (often being invoked through ignorance)2 or was invoked because someone in the chain simply didn’t want to do something (including good reason, like an activity was ill-advised). Often, the “prohibited” activity could be conducted by another group but was no longer viable due to delays or institutional barriers.
While attention to the what and the why we need to act, whether reactively or proactively, is hugely important, discussing how we do and do not act is huger. The above points to leadership deficiencies across levels.
The informational element is hard. It takes leadership to encourage, support, and empower people to consider, integrate, organize, and execute appropriately. Leaders from the top down need to do a better job explaining why an informational element is essential, how it works, and what is needed. It is essential, too, that leaders create the understanding and acceptance that mistakes will happen. We are more complacent, organizationally and conceptually, with an errant munition than we are with an errant message. This is both a symptom and cause and it should be likened to unilateral disarmament, except this phrasing implies we were effectively armed in this regard. Perhaps “self-denial” is better since it also applies to “solutions,” like imagining a new org chart will magically manifest in the necessary leadership, cross-agency collaboration, resourcing, and prioritizing that has been missing for decades.
I included an AI-generated image for the social posts of this article to link to the MountainRunner name. The prompt to ChatGPT was “trail running in Zermatt below the Matterhorn.” There are errors in the image, of course, and it wouldn’t be mistaken for a photograph, but it’s actually pretty good as it does evoke memories I had there. Here’s the picture if you got this through email.
Zermatt is one of my favorite destinations in Switzerland. I’ve been many times for running, including a couple for the Zermatt Ultramarathon (about 28.5 miles with 7800’ of ascent) and several times to ride my gravel bike up, across, and down the same trails (one such ride was 23 miles with 6100’ of ascent). For an apple-to-orange comparison, here’s one of those gravel rides taken a bit higher up in elevation from the notional elevation (based on the tree line, greenery, and general trail condition) of the AI-generated picture.
I suppose providing the time doesn’t really matter since you have to be there, but just in case.
Since we have “received wisdom,” we should also acknowledge “received ignorance.”
Nice ride.