Deletion of Pentagon message machine

Comment: By no means is this the first such topic about a government response to controversy. Simply at the present time and in the U.S., there are related topics with more sourcing, such as the Office of Special Plans, which is far more sourced. I encountered this topic as a new category added to force multiplication, which is decidedly non-national, and see a link as  or .  I might well support a general article on international experience with government news influencing, as well as country-specific articles of broader scope. For example, CIA influence on public opinion deals with issues over many decades, not one scandal
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Neutral point of view (WP:POV||WP:UNDUE)

Comment: This was a major exposé in the NYT and several other media outlets have secondary coverage of the NYT's scoop today.  isn't a reason to delete this. This operation was quite successful, so I don't see how the operation is "criticism" and the operation is or was of an entirely different and separate nature than the project covered in the "rapid response" article. There have been calls now for a Congressional investigation of the Pentagon message machine, so I believe this stub has potential. Anyway, I was going to take a wait and see approach, but I'll expand the article in light of the AfD
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions (WP:IDONTLIKEIT)