Eating Your Own Dog Food

There’s a marketing expression “you have to eat your own dog food” which is used to express the notion that a company has to show its confidence in its product by using it. In many of my previous entries I have advocated Cyber PSYOP as a technique to be embraced to reach the 10% of a population that might be considered ‘elite’ influencers and/or to reach the more educated and affluent population.

As a resident of Silicon Valley I’m expected to be conversant with the latest trends.

I use Linkedin for my professional contacts and try to update my status as a way of letting my professional network know what I’m up to. It’s also subtle marketing by reminding those who get my updates of exactly what I am capable of doing so that they can steer some business my way.

Facebook on the other hand I use of people that would go out and have a coffee with. This doesn’t necessarily make you my bosom buddy, but the sociability aspects of Facebook ‘friends’ cannot be denied.

I have a Twitter account, but candidly haven’t spent any time futzing with it.

What does this have to do with PSYOP?

First of all I have created a PSYOP Facebook page. However, for reasons known only to the Facebook Gods I have had to call it the “Military Information Support Community” page. It’s part of eating your own dog food. I have total control over the Blog, but I’m curious as to how a Facebook page might evolve as a communication media for the Community. There is a Linkedin PSYOP Group, but the flavor is not community – it has a distinct business tone to it.

Check it out!

Social Networks are a source of intelligence. They can provide interesting information and images of groups and individuals. This data, like any other potential intelligence must be evaluated for its credibility, likelihood of truth, etc.

No two target audiences will employ social networking in the same way. They might use the same sites such as Facebook, MySpace, etc depending on which site is the most popular or best suited for their purposes. For the most part I believe postings are intended to be seen. While there may be covert meanings to overt messages, the poster wants the message to be seen.

Investigators and others routinely adopt pseudonyms and alternative characteristics to investigate and prowl social networks. The November 10, 2010 San Jose Mercury News reported about a Pacific Gas & Electric director who was spying on opponents of smart electric meters (see http://www.mercurynews.com/top-stories/ci_16575862?nclick_check=1 ) using false names.

So commenting on posting, setting up pages, etc. can be a way to reach selected targets.

Twitter is a different beast. Tweets can reveal quite a bit about a target and Twitter can also serve as as a transmit medium as well.

PSYOPers need to be sure that they understand the dynamics of the target environment (read that geography) so that they don’t overlay their own personal prejudices and habits from the own personal social network use.