Talk:Office of Strategic Influence

message: Use FAS as source for quotes if removed from DefenseLINK: http://www.fas.org/sgp/news/2002/02/dod022602.html and http://www.fas.org/sgp/news/2002/11/dod111802.html
External link from The Register http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/28/28631.html
:See also FAIR's The Office of Strategic Influence Is Gone, But Are Its Programs In Place? Mr. Jones 16:12, 14 Jun 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sources for information and quotes 

message: I reverted the previous version, not becaus I disagree/agree with its content but because it read like a badly written magazine article, with inappropriate second-hand quotes shoved here and there. This is an encyclopedia and articles should be written in encyclopedia style. There are LOTS of controversial topics on wikipedia that present controversial issues in encyclopedic manner - check around and see. - DavidWBrooks 12:24, 28 May 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  revert 

message: I understand David's concern to keep the article in line with professional editorial style. In this case, however, I feel that useful information was lost in the editorial process. As an officiall acknowledged institution, the OSI was extremely short-lived. Therefore, the circumstances of its closure are the most interesting aspects of the Wiki entry.
Regarding the closure, I feel that it is important to see that Rumsfeld made it sound like Feith decided to close the office. This is important, because Rumsfeld later admitted that he decided to keep the office open, and use the official closure of the office for deflection of public interest.
Instead of deleting the information, I suggest to elaborate on it as follows:
This article is about the former U.S. Government department. For the rock band named after this organization, see OSI (band)
The Office of Strategic Influence, or OSI, was a department set up in the United States Department of Defense in late 2001 or early 2002, to support the War on terrorism through psychological operations in targeted countries. The closure of the office was announced by Donald Rumsfeld soon after its existence became publically known.
The OSI would have been a center for the creation of propaganda materials, for the stated purpose of misleading enemy forces or their civilian populations. After information on the office spread through US and foreign media in mid February 2002, intense discussions on purpose and scope of the office were reported. The discussions culminated in a public statement by Donald Rumsfeld on 2002-02-26 that the office has been closed down.
Some argue that due to its nature and stated purpose, the (non-)existence of such an agency would be hard to determine. In fact, in November 2002, Donald Rumsfeld himself stated in an interview that only the name of the office was abolished, that it further exists and that it pursues its original purpose. 
=== Quotes by US Officials ===
:"[Doug Feith] indicated to me that he has decided to close down the Office of Strategic Influence. [...] So it's being closed down." - Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, 2002-02-26 
:"And then there was the office of strategic influence. [...] I went down that next day and said fine, if you want to savage this thing fine I'll give you the corpse. There's the name. You can have the name, but I'm gonna keep doing every single thing that needs to be done and I have. That was intended to be done by that office is being done by that office, NOT by that office in other ways." - Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, 2002-11-18 
=== Other articles on psychological warfare ===
*Black ops
*Psychological operations, and the presence of Ft Bragg's 4th Psyops Gp at CNN and NPR CP
=== External links ===
* BBC news story about the creation of the OSI
*FAIR
*PC
*WSWS
:: That certainly is much better. But the "quotes by public officials" section is kind of weird - the casual reader coming across this article would not understand the historical point we're trying to make. The situation should first be summarized, to give the quotes some context.- DavidWBrooks 13:39, 29 May 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  New proposal 

message: * BBC news story about the creation of the OSI
*FAIR
*PC
*WSWS
:: That certainly is much better. But the "quotes by public officials" section is kind of weird - the casual reader coming across this article would not understand the historical point we're trying to make. The situation should first be summarized, to give the quotes some context.- DavidWBrooks 13:39, 29 May 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links 

message: David, I agree that there is a need to improve the quotations section. It could be done by some kind of timeline of official statements:
=== Timeline of Official Statements ===
* Feith: First of all I want to clarify that when Defense Department officials speak to the public they tell the truth, and despite some of the reports about the Office of Strategic Influence that I've read over the last day or two, Defense Department officials don't lie to the public. And we are confident that the truth serves our interests in the broadest sense of national security and specifically in this war. 
* Rumsfeld, Feb 2002: closure of OSI
* Rumsfeld, Nov 2002: non-closure of OSI
What do you think? If agreeable, I would do the corresponding edit.
: Personally, I think it still comes across as an attempt to make these guys look bad, instead of an attempt to provide the reader with information. Information in encyclopedias is stated, not implied from second-source quotes. Can't you just say what happened? Something like "Uncertainty about the workings of OSI extended even to its closure, which was first announced  ..." - DavidWBrooks 13:09, 30 May 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Agree to need for improving quotations 

message: * Feith: First of all I want to clarify that when Defense Department officials speak to the public they tell the truth, and despite some of the reports about the Office of Strategic Influence that I've read over the last day or two, Defense Department officials don't lie to the public. And we are confident that the truth serves our interests in the broadest sense of national security and specifically in this war. 
* Rumsfeld, Feb 2002: closure of OSI
* Rumsfeld, Nov 2002: non-closure of OSI
What do you think? If agreeable, I would do the corresponding edit.
: Personally, I think it still comes across as an attempt to make these guys look bad, instead of an attempt to provide the reader with information. Information in encyclopedias is stated, not implied from second-source quotes. Can't you just say what happened? Something like "Uncertainty about the workings of OSI extended even to its closure, which was first announced  ..." - DavidWBrooks 13:09, 30 May 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Timeline of Official Statements 

message: This could use a section about OSI's actions in the aftermath of the Battle of Nasriya, in which over a dozen Marines were killed by friendly fire and Jessica Lynch's convoy was attacked. The office intentionally spread disinformation about Lynch's capture and the cause of death for the soldiers killed by friendly fire. This is documented in Jon Krakauer's book, Where Men Win Glory. I'm sure there are other sources as well.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by DS Riley (talk • contribs) 15:51, 31 May 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Actions After Battle of Nasriya 

message: It ought to be deleted. This is a business that was closed down after five months. The sources say that its goals and powers were never decided. That it took no official actions. And was closed. The end. TheThomas (talk) 04:23, 15 May 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  This is basically the worst article on wikipedia. 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Office of Strategic Influence. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20091207052906/http://archives.cnn.com/2002/US/02/19/gen.strategic.influence/ to http://archives.cnn.com/2002/US/02/19/gen.strategic.influence/
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 08:24, 6 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified