Must. Be. AWESOME!! - Latest Comments

Re: So Far, Digital Comics Are Not AWESOME

da raphael — Wed, 01 May 2013 08:10:27 -0000

I've been waiting years for comics to be a respectable presence online. I would have thought they'd have learned from that whole napster to applestore evolution from over a decade ago. I bet they're losing untold billions because of their unwillingness to evolve. I live in 3rd world country, there tend to be no specialty comic bookstores in any of these countries, and the stands where they do end up don't really care about stocking them with any regularity, or volume, and absolutely none have any of the rarer or more mature comics. Much of these countries have broadband, and growing numbers of people with credit/debit cards and paypal who at the same time don't want to spend more on comics, so it would be more than worthwhile, while the publishers could save on end seller and massive transport costs. They could even get their comics translated into rarer languages using crowdsourcing

Re: Painting on a White Canvas

du4 — Tue, 05 Feb 2013 15:30:07 -0000

Thanks, Dean!

Re: Painting on a White Canvas

Dean — Mon, 04 Feb 2013 20:48:03 -0000

Chris, I like your style--at least what I've read in the past 5 minutes (how's that for making snap judgments?). Talk to you tomorrow about WCG. Good energy, dude!

Re: Retweeting Democracy: The Role of Social Media | Global Research TV

Deasopakpasop — Thu, 13 Oct 2011 02:52:26 -0000

A Great Facility this is.
Thank You,
Mr John Brown.

Re: Found me a dive bar w/ live blues & Abita! #hellyes

Benjamin Ulstein — Tue, 19 Jul 2011 20:13:38 -0000

Hey, can I PLEASE fix your sidebar, it's ugly and I can't read a thing.

Regards,
me fixing websites that look ugly. no offense. but it's true. it truly is.

Re: WTF Is Information Operations???

du4 — Sun, 17 Jul 2011 18:35:06 -0000

I don't disagree that DOD's current doctrinal definition of IO is woefully unsuitable, not to mention archaic and backward-looking. And I love your concept of a better dividing line between connectivity and content-cognitive.

Re: WTF Is Information Operations???

Daninfowar — Sat, 16 Jul 2011 22:08:10 -0000

I've been teaching IO and its forebear, Information Warfare, for nearly 20 years, so permit me to comment. The definition you provide and the "5 pillars" below it, taken from the Joint Doctrine pub 3-13 (under revision), are essentially mutually incompatible approaches, with the definition being crafted to end the stovepiped pillars approach. Those five pillars had always been segmented across elements of the OSD, further increasing the dysfunctionality of that approach. IMHO, IO can be differentiated into two different but related fields, what the Russians categorize as "information-technical" and "information-psychological", and what I describe as the "connectivity" and "content-cognitive" elements of the information environment.

Re: IO Europe Wrap-up

du4 — Mon, 11 Jul 2011 12:04:33 -0000

You bet-- thanks for reading!

Re: IO Europe Wrap-up

Mary Clare Gumbleton — Thu, 07 Jul 2011 16:31:19 -0000

Nice round-up, Chris! Thanks for sharing your insights.

Re: Guitar Porn

du4 — Fri, 29 Apr 2011 10:27:40 -0000

Thanks for reading, Colin! I'm an amateur as well, but DAMN if I don't love the look of a fine guitar.

Still owe you drinks sometime, mate!

Re: Guitar Porn

colinstorm — Thu, 28 Apr 2011 14:21:08 -0000

Love it, great eye candy. Wish I knew how to handle one properly, I'm such an amateur! I'm pretty sure I saw the far right unknown plastic kids toy in a video during the glory that as the 80's! Can't think of the song thought.

Re: Station Ident: Better Places

Marble Repair — Fri, 01 Apr 2011 09:10:14 -0000

Must be awesome!

Re: Public Diplomacy for AWESOME People… the Du4 Way!

du4 — Fri, 25 Feb 2011 10:36:50 -0000

I'm ambivalent on the "World Trust" concept. I like the idea of a funding mechanism for communication innovation, but we have to reform the acquisition system first. It's just too hard for small and medium sized business (to say nothing of individuals and NGOs) to apply for a government grant or contract. A better idea would be to empower a YCombinator-type organization in the private sector with quasi governmental coordination/makeup, essentially using the best parts of the tech VC/investing community to rapidly start up and scale projects and ideas into sustainable businesses and/or nonprofits. Even achieving this, however, would require a national strategy for communication and/or influence (former NSC folks called it P2, BTW- "Persuasion & Perception") that detailed U.S. themes, objectives, and goals, all of which would be needed by a private sector funding mechanism of this type for guidance.

The more I think about it though, the more I prefer the social power of individual citizens and private sector organizations making these things happen on their own. Government goals and themes will change with administrations but look how well a theme like "Don't be evil" has worked out for Google.

Re: Public Diplomacy for AWESOME People… the Du4 Way!

Meg — Thu, 24 Feb 2011 17:06:56 -0000

It's also important to define what is meant by "coordinated" and "one-voice" approaches re government communicatons. The Federal Government and its collective missions are by definition diverse. Too many times communications can be stalled by interpreting the idea of a coordinated effort very narrowly. This can lead to a "message of the day" mentality, which defeats the purpose - funneling communications back to a trickle with even more layers of approval rather than allowing for a flexible enough framework where staff are empowered to proactively reach out and interact with others as SMEs regarding their areas of expertise.

Re: Public Diplomacy for AWESOME People… the Du4 Way!

Lena — Thu, 24 Feb 2011 16:52:04 -0000

Tend to agree. But inevitably, there's the question: what about all the "networking" talk? Should there be one, or should the good old-and-proven mode of "messaging" rule the day? I'm ambivalent about both: I see where the reasoning behind the former comes from, but then it seems like all the others in the world go with the well-walked path and seem to be expecting the same.
Yet, you're so right in terms of credibility. THAT is the issue, and not the medium (since the latter does not automatically guarantee credibility).

Re: Public Diplomacy for AWESOME People… the Du4 Way!

Geoff B. — Thu, 24 Feb 2011 16:32:35 -0000

I think the Symphony analogy holds true. the US government is pretty bad at coordinating all of its branches at once, and that stems from the often competitive nature of our political system. With this in mind, is the idea of a revamped "Department of Public Diplomacy," whether in the State Department or separate, feasible? In another vein, how can the government utilize social media and individual citizens as "ambassadors" for the US? Twitter, Facebook, etc. have been in the media spotlight of numerous revolutions and protests recently, and I'm sure the USG has given their use some consideration.

Re: Public Diplomacy for AWESOME People… the Du4 Way!

Lisa M. — Thu, 24 Feb 2011 15:11:53 -0000

Given the views discussed here, do you think there is potential awesome-ness to be had through encouraging private actors to coordinate based on shared goals and values in an effort to further US national interests? Or, should we develop a "USA World Trust"? I guess my real struggle is where do www want to be on the scale of government association, in order to create the most effective, credible, and flexible public diplomacy strategy?
-Lisa M.

Re: Public Diplomacy for AWESOME People… the Du4 Way!

Melissa M — Thu, 24 Feb 2011 14:00:11 -0000

I find the fact that the disregard of PD by the State Department to be irrelevant is one of the biggest problems facing our government that it itself doesn't seem to realize. Communication is influence, like you said. And someone trying to argue otherwise is ignorant. For our government to work collectively on communication initiatives...it will have to finally put value (and therefore power) in communication.

Re: Public Diplomacy for AWESOME People… the Du4 Way!

Laura Lrtig — Thu, 24 Feb 2011 12:50:10 -0000

Like the double face palm, can identify with it. I also have to say as someone who just left a certain govt. agency and worked for politicos that carried out their public diplomacy efforts day-to-day in a knee-jerk reaction style and on the fly, there was little or no strategic, orchestrated or advance planning in their communications efforts, and the folks who really wanted to understand their leaders' vision were SOL. I don't think it's asking too much to stop simply being reactive but to actually try to be out in front in a disciplined way whenever and wherever possible. Better use of tax dollars AND wouldn't waste public servants' time. But then having politicos in many PD positions throughout government is a whole other can o' worms!

Re: Public Diplomacy for AWESOME People… the Du4 Way!

du4 — Thu, 24 Feb 2011 09:53:53 -0000

Laura, there is DEFINITELY that risk. However, we only mitigate risks in the execution of a particular discipline by GETTING BETTER AT THAT DISCIPLINE. That means training and education. Presently, we do not even offer top-notch training and continuing education within each of the varied silos of PD and SC, to say nothing of an interagency pedigree or standard.

Personally, I don't have a problem with my government speaking with one voice as long as the MESSAGE is credible. That takes a lot of coordination, a lot of discipline, and a STRATEGY, however, to articulate and manage properly. No one has ever, EVER, published a national U.S. strategy for its integrated communication, influence, and engagement with the world... and that is a problem in this day and age.

Re: Public Diplomacy for AWESOME People… the Du4 Way!

du4 — Thu, 24 Feb 2011 09:49:27 -0000

I don't think it's naive at all, NotTellingYou, but I -do- think your defeatist interpretation of an integrated national communication apparatus is lame. Strategically, our government should be seeking out ways to CONNECT all disciplines within our influence arsenal, not disambiguate them because of weak-ass excuses like "It's too hard!" or "The interagency cultures won't mix!" Bullshit. I demand my taxes be spent BETTER.

Re: Public Diplomacy for AWESOME People… the Du4 Way!

Laura McG — Thu, 24 Feb 2011 09:08:16 -0000

Call me a sucker, but I liked the symphony analogy. That said, isn't there a risk of tainting the message (in the perception of some recipients) if all communication is seen as a coordinated government effort? In cases where there's a discrepancy between U.S. communication and U.S. action, there's something to be said for distance. The recent Masrawy.com conversation, for example, might have invited less skepticism has Sec. Clinton not been behind it.

Looking forward to class tonight.

Re: Public Diplomacy for AWESOME People… the Du4 Way!

Not Tellingyou — Wed, 23 Feb 2011 19:51:05 -0000

Your description of "all national branches" making up a "big, beautiful symphony" is as naive a fantasy as I've heard -- and one typical of information warfare types. The United States is too big and diverse to act out its propaganda.
- USIA veteran

Re: Station Ident: Better Places

Marble Repair — Sat, 05 Feb 2011 06:55:19 -0000

Awesome view!

Re: Station Ident: Wherever You Go, There You Are

du4 — Wed, 26 Jan 2011 08:52:41 -0000

OMG, great idea about the Oasis t-shirts! I may just have to do that!