Information Support Operations An Afterthought At Best for Homeland Security

On May 21 & 22, 2011 I was an evaluator for an exercise which took place in a major city. The city is the hub of an 8 city Urban Area Security Initiative (UASI). Federal government grant money paid most of the bills and sponsors took care of most of the rest.

The exercise involved 4 Emergency Operation Centers scattered over the area and was a series of ‘lanes’ designed to test Police SWAT (Special Weapons & Tactics), Fire, Urban Search & Rescue (USR), Emergency Ordinance Disposal (EOD), Emergency Medical Services (EMS). Each lane was coordinated by one agency and evaluators came from far and wide.

By design, the event is overall very low key, although there was an initial press conference attended by the city’s mayor and other dignitaries which resulted in some coverage prior to the event.

Media access was limited during the exercise and there were scant posters or other indications of locations or tactical lanes. In short it was akin to a military operation where the name of the game is to keep the public out of the way to minimize interference with the operation and maximize Operational Security (OPSEC).

While I can understand this posture in terms of external information support, I felt I was in a time warp when it came to the exercise play. There was absolutely no attention to the potential negative effect of information operations either intentional or accidental. Just as in my early Army exercise (PRC-6 anyone?) days, guidance was put out that communications are not to be interfered with because it was hard enough to communicate during the height of battle without someone messing with you.

More importantly the notions of misinformation, hostile crowds and pesky reporters were not considered at all. As for presence, there was only a single Public Affairs Officer at the central EOC with a few of the agency PAOs training their principals, but not actively involved in the exercise.

On the Command information side, EOC communications were via a chat like software package called WebEOC. No video and not very much contemporaneous reporting from other sources contributed to the CDR’s situational awareness.

Given the 24 hour news cycle, the persistence of paparazzi, and the ubiquity of cell phone video cameras – this is a mistake. Our enemies are clearly not stupid and are likely surveilling soft targets as you are reading this. The inability to provide information support operations in homeland security is a vulnerability that is open to exploitation by our enemies. DOD and DHS need to take the initiative and incorporate the informational aspects of homeland security into their efforts and as key elements in the Homeland Security Exercise and Evaluation Program (HSEEP) and a key factor in determining if the government got its money’s worth for its grant funding.

Al Jazeera – A True Strategic Communicator!

The Doha, Qatar based Al Jazeera has received gushing reviews of its coverage of the Egyptian demonstrations that began on January 25, 2011. Main stream media such as the NY Times with its 7 February article: Televising the Revolution (see http://www.nytimes.com/2011/02/07/business/media/07aljazeera.html?_r=1&scp=1&sq=Televising%20the%20revolution&st=cse) are also noting that Al Jazeera is seeking to raise its global profile by being permitted on US television. US English speakers interested in viewing Al Jazeera have to use the Internet (http://english.aljazeera.net/). (Photo Source is the AJ website shown)

The Doha, Qatar based Al Jazeera has received gushing reviews of its coverage of the Egyptian demonstrations that began on January 25, 2011. Main stream media such as the NY Times with its 7 February article: Televising the Revolution (see http://www.nytimes.com/2011/02/07/business/media/07aljazeera.html?_r=1&scp=1&sq=Televising%20the%20revolution&st=cse) are also noting that Al Jazeera is seeking to raise its global profile by being permitted on US television. US English speakers interested in viewing Al Jazeera have to use the Internet (http://english.aljazeera.net/).

The network has often been criticized for its biased reporting and negative rhetoric aimed at the US and Israel. Arab supporters on the other hand claim that Al Jazeera offers one of the few unvarnished views of events in the Middle East - - untainted by Western influence.

There is no doubt that the network wants a US presence and wants it badly. They tried to push their case even further by taking out a full page ad in the NY Times which, for its part reported that the Network has a meeting scheduled with Comcast.

There are several potential reasons why the network wants into the US market. First of all there’s the money, the US is a large lucrative market for advertising and its viewers represent what may be an under served market.

There are potentially more nefarious reasons. Once the network gets on the US airwaves they will have the protection of free speech and freedom of the press. Protection not afforded to them in certain quarters of the Arab world.

They will also have a means to reach an impressionable American public that tends to believe what it sees on TV rather than the facts behind the events. This is a bully pulpit from which to broadcast slanted and biased news heavily laced with provocative imagery. This kind of influence on public opinion has altered political actions in the course of history more than once.

Lastly, the US market might prove to be a fertile ground to recruit disaffected youth to become international or domestic terrorists.

Consequently it is not clear what the network’s true motives are at this point. However, it is clear that they have taken the strategic step of recognizing the opportunity presented to them by the Egyptian events. This opportunity allowed them to put aside some of their traditional viewpoints and objectives in favor of tactics designed to establish their journalistic bona fides in order to achieve a more long term set of strategic objectives to be gained by entry into the US broadcasting arena.

Counter PSYOP – The Hasan Matter

Bad news, unlike wine and chicken soup, does not get better with age. The murders at Fort Hood will haunt our collective consciousness for some time to come. Make no mistake, our enemies are pondering how to use the tragedy for their own purposes and we need to be ready with counter PSYOP, in fact we need to be sending messages right now. Photo credit: AP via Washington Post

Hasan’s links to ‘radical cleric’ (see Washington Post, 18 November 2009 http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/11/17/AR2009111703830.html?wpisrc=newsletter) is one of many Monday morning quarterback articles across the media. I won’t concern myself with the law enforcement aspects but point to the PSYOP aspect - -word of mouth, especially from credible (to their audience) religious leaders is a powerful recruiting tool and a means to keep their followers engaged against the perceived enemy.

From an enemy PSYOP perspective let’s honestly reflect on what they have to work with. First of all there is an incredible wealth of video and photographic imagery of the carnage at Fort Hood and pictures of MAJ Hasan in uniform. There is also a wealth of information on his alleged beliefs and even a PowerPoint.

The enemy is more than likely going to employ some of these on the Internet and perhaps even orchestrate the spider webbing of word of mouth showing how the jihad’s righteousness has been accepted by Muslims even in America and even by those who have mistakenly taken up the cause and worn the uniform of the infidel.

What do we need to do about it? First of all we need to reemphasize the message that we are not at war with Islam, but with terrorists. However, while there needs to be direct USG messaging from President Obama and Secret Clinton on down the line, American sources are not enough. We must enlist the aid of credible Muslim religious leaders to speak out against the atrocity and reiterate the criminal, anti-Islamic and abhorrent nature of the act.

We need to show that the defendant is assumed innocent until proven guilty. If appropriate messaging concerning his medical care after the incident along with the on-going story of the criminal prosecution may be of value.

It might also make sense to have messaging from Muslim Chaplains and individuals currently serving in the US military to underscore the fact that Hasan is an aberration and that serving in the US military is consistent with Islamic beliefs.

The point is we know the enemy is resourceful and employs a high degree of information agility – we need to launch an information offensive before we are caught flat footed once again.

Strategic Communications: Funding Little Old Grannies Who Wear Veils

It’s very hard to find something positive to say about Strategic Communications these days. Afghanistan and Iraq dominate the headlines and make the world appear to be a very bleak place.However, there are a couple of bright spots for those in Strategic Communications willing to think out of the box and take a longer range view than tomorrow’s headline. The September 3, 2009 Arts Section of the NY Times featured an article entitled: Dubai Superheros: Little Old Grannies Who Wear Veils (http://www.nytimes.com/2009/09/03/arts/television/03animated.html?scp=1&sq=Dubai%20Superheros&st=cse) Photo: NY Times

Mohammed Saeed Harib nor Freej, the United Arab Emirate’s (UAE) and therefore very likely the Middle East’s first 3-D animated series may not be as well known as the Simpsons or South Park, but the potential for the Grannie Superheros is worthy of note because it indicates a societal maturation. Societies that have a means to look at themselves and raise issues through ‘characters’ are better able to deal with issues and inequities thwarting the appeal of fundamentalism.

During my service in Bosnia it was clear to me that a free and credible media was a fundamental cornerstone of any nation. Citizens need to be informed and be able to dialog about their societies.

The next level of sophistication is another way for society’s to view themselves and that’s entertainment as a vehicle to address social issues. Freej cannot attack issues head on like The Simpsons or South Park and must of necessity is an indirect approach.

Supporting an entertainment venture like Freej might not seem like Strategic Communication – but it clearly is because as Freej and other forms of entertainment open up issues for discussion and perhaps potential action they can facilitate the positive transformation of a society.

Over time sociological entertainment from the UAE would likely be exported to other areas of the region and perhaps even spawn copy cat programs that would have a local spin, yet still have the positive effect of expanding societal expression.

I should also point out that Mr. Harib attended Northeastern University in Boston which has itself evolved from a commuter based university built on balancing work experience and academic study to one of the top 100 universities in the US, and oh yes, my Alma Mater!

Congress and Strategic Communications – Are They On The Right Track?

Today’s Washington Post covered comments made by the Senate and House Armed Services Committees concerning Strategic Communications. Rather than point to failings of the military I believe it shows that President Obama – one of the great info warriors of our time – is paying more attention to communicating with the American Voter than to the world audience. (see http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/07/27/AR2009072701896.html)
(Pictured are Senator Carl Levin, Chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee and Representative Ike Skelton, Chairman of the House Armed Services Committee)

There were several key points raised by Congress in the article:

1. Strategic Communications Programs are too big, have grown too fast to allow effective oversight, it is impossible to determine whether the efforts are integrated within DOD or with the broader US government” and Pentagon planning “is insufficient compared to the needs.”

2. The military is producing propaganda and other materials that mask US government sponsorship and focus beyond traditional military IO – they are “alarmingly non-military propaganda, public relations and behavioral modification messaging.”

3. There needs to be a new legal review of the law prohibiting strategic communications (or PSYOP) accessible by American audiences.

Presidential Action Need to Command and Control Strategic Communications

Given that funding for Strategic Communications is rapidly approaching $1Billion and that there is no central control or coordination of these efforts across the USG it seems to me Congress is right on. There are other critical issues here though. First of all it appears that the President has not focused any attention on strategic communication. His information advisors are concentrating on making sure the Health Care Agenda goes forward and are paying scant attention to foreign audiences.

The President or his designated Information Leader needs to be the focal point for Strategic Communications and Public Diplomacy because our efforts worldwide are moving to information engagement over kinetic operations and this trend is likely to accelerate over time. The President needs to be mindful of the previous criticism of USG information management and the disaster experienced by the Pentagon Office that sought to address this issue.

There needs to be an approved overall USG information engagement strategy and a designated leader for it reporting to the President. Only be applying the principle of unity of Command will the USG be able to effectively manage its information engagement efforts and determine the adequacy of planning and resourcing for the task.

Information Engagement Must Be More Than Military

Congress has missed the boat on the ‘military nature’ of strategic communications. DOD is the critical resource serving as a conduit of information to civilian audiences. US forces abroad are faced with the need to effectively communicate to foreign audiences on their own soil. This messaging is inherently non-military in nature. The so called ‘winning of hearts and mind’ is no longer the leaflet urging surrender. Rather the messages are support your government, help defeat the insurgents, explore possibilities for a more stable economy – the stuff of nation building and bolstering governments rather than the traditional messages associated with combat.

Information Laws Are Obsolete

The Internet Age has brought the world to smart phones, the notion of ideas being bound by traditional national borders is nonsense and the time has come to amend the laws restricting information engagement even if American audiences can receive the messages.

Blog Entry, 30 June 09 – PSYOP Skating to the Puck

I’m generally much of a sports fan, but I do follow, rodeo, football and hockey. And while I don’t often employ sports analogies, ‘skating to the puck’ is a good one. It implies that the player must anticipate where the puck is going and be at the right place at the right time to make the winning play.



Countries with the largest Muslim population as of 2008:
Indonesia 204 Million
Pakistan 164 Million
India 154 Million
Bangladesh 128 Million
Turkey 76 Million
Egypt 74 Million
Nigeria 73 Million
Iran 65 Million
Morocco 34 Million
Algeria 33 Million
Afghanistan 32 Million
Saudi Arabia 28 Million
Sudan 28 Million
China 27 Million
Egypt 27 Million
Iraq 27 Million
Ethiopia 27 Million

Source: http://islam.about.com/od/muslimcountries/a/population.htm
In my view skating to the puck means employing Strategic PSYOP to addre
ss audiences in Indonesia, Turkey, Nigeria, Morocco, and Algeria because while only Algeria has been in the news with respect to Al Qaeda (e.g. Washington Post @ http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/05/29/AR2007052901967.html) the other nations are critical to global long term peace and prosperity.

Indonesia should be at the top of the list because it has the largest Islamic population and because it is a keystone of Asia and a symbol to the rest of the world. According to the CIA Factbook “Indonesia's first free parliamentary election after decades of repressive rule took place in 1999. Indonesia is now the world's third-largest democracy, …. and home to the world's largest Muslim population. Current issues include: alleviating poverty, improving education, preventing terrorism, consolidating democracy after four decades of authoritarianism, implementing economic and financial reforms, stemming corruption, holding the military and police accountable for past human rights violations, addressing climate change, and controlling avian influenza.” (https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/ID.html)

Indonesia faces a myriad of issues and the USG clearly should have messaging that addresses many of them. Furthermore Indonesia’s role in Asia will become more pivotal as China’s political, economic and military influence continues to grow. Indonesia must receive significant strategic communications attention as a prophylaxis to alleviate potentially serious issues in the future.

USG strategic communications will of necessity combine Department of State and Department of Defense information engagement efforts. As a core principle of democracy, the Executive Branch’s civilians drive Strategic Communications under the direction of the Ambassador in line with guidance from the President and Secretary of State Clinton.

Admiral Timothy J. Keating, Commander of the Pacific Command has a number of informational resources at his disposal as does the Commander of the US Special Operations Command. These DOD resources ought to be ‘de-conflicted’ so that they are additive in effect. After all marketing is cumulative. These efforts will likely include traditional media and the Internet. Given the burgeoning growth of mobile phones in Asia, campaigns employing Text Messages, e-mails and social networking are also appropriate especially to reach the young adult population which is a very large chunk of the overall population.

Time in the posting does not permit an analysis of other countries and their potential for strategic communications. Suffice it to say that Turkey is critical the US and global security so that it should be singled out for special attention as well.

PSYOP and PT Barnum

This week’s lead posting was supposed to be a thoughtful perspective about PSYOP Regimental Week last week at Fort Bragg. However, there is just too good of a target of opportunity to pass up.

Sunday’s (8 June 09) Washington Post featured an article entitled: “A High-Priced Media Campaign That Iraqis Aren't Buying” (see http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/06/06/AR2009060602144.html)

The article leads off by describing Baghdad Now, a newspaper that according to the article “has no publicly known editor, no bylines and no ads”. The article continues by saying that the paper is free and distributed by soldiers.

Is this a giant waste of money or not? It should be obvious that Baghdad Now is not a ‘real’ paper because it doesn’t cost anything and doesn’t have any ads, but does that mean the entire effort is a waste of money?

At the risk of sounding like an attorney, it depends. On the one hand there would appear to be a real credibility gap, but on the other, even if only a limited numbers of Iraqi’s read the paper hasn’t it accomplished something? Actually I think the money and energy could be better spent in other ways.

There is a big difference between tactical PSYOP support to a particular operation or set of operations. For example, PSYOP in support of a cordon and search operation has a finite beginning and a clear end point. PSYOP support to induce an enemy force to surrender or to convince insurgents to leave the area also has concrete metes and bounds. These assignments are clearly the meat and potatoes of tactical PSYOP in general and US Army PSYOP in particular.

However, these missions are in stark contrast to the loftier, more strategic goals of supporting the USG’s goals of bolstering the Iraqi government and insuring a secure environment as US troops withdraw.

Publishing a newspaper even for an audience you know well is not easy. The financial woes of the US printed newspaper industry are not exclusively a US problem and attest to the difficulties facing this medium.

Newspapers must give their readers a reason to pick them up. Local papers in particular are succeeding by providing local news that the regional or national media just can’t provide. Local politics, local social events, local religious celebrations and news of one’s neighbors are the stuff of well read local papers. Local papers also prominently publish obituaries because they are important to the community. A newspaper that only published fluff and generalities would quickly find itself out of business.

Of course the Washington Post may not be presenting the full picture, after all their job is also to sell papers and stories about USG efforts that are going well or can’t be connected to the Abu Ghraib debacle won’t sell nearly as well as those that do. Having said, it seems to me that US influence efforts would be better spent in partnership efforts with existing credible media. The resulting product won’t be the everything is rosy approach of Baghdad Now, but the interaction with credible local journalists can ultimately develop into the relationships and journalistic philosophy necessary for an impartial reporting of the news or at least a less judgmental view that doesn’t tar all the actions of the Iraqi government or the US forces trying to support it.

White House Homeland Security Council Merged Into the National Security Council

President Obama has directed that the White House Homeland Security Council and the National Security Council be merged with the combined staff of about 240 personnel reporting to National Security Advisor General James Jones, USMC (Ret).

(See http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/05/26/AR2009052603148.html?sub=AR or http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/27/us/27homeland.html?_r=1&scp=1&sq=Security%20Shuffle&st=cse) (Photo Source: http://www.defenselink.mil/dodcmsshare/newsstoryPhoto/2003-01/200301092a.jpg)

The White House website does not have a listing of the members of the NSC except for those who are required to be members by statute. According to the White House Website:

“The NSC is chaired by the President. Its regular attendees (both statutory and non-statutory) are the Vice President, the Secretary of State, the Secretary of the Treasury, the Secretary of Defense, and the Assistant to the President for National Security Affairs. The Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff is the statutory military advisor to the Council, and the Director of National Intelligence is the intelligence advisor. The Chief of Staff to the President, Counsel to the President, and the Assistant to the President for Economic Policy are invited to attend any NSC meeting. The Attorney General and the Director of the Office of Management and Budget are invited to attend meetings pertaining to their responsibilities. The heads of other executive departments and agencies, as well as other senior officials, are invited to attend meetings of the NSC when appropriate.” (http://www.whitehouse.gov/administration/eop/nsc/)

This is prudent recognition that the dangers facing our country no know borders. The action should have the effect of increased information sharing among staff members and perhaps a more cohesive approach to security issues overall.

A key question that should be raised is: how will the new and improved organization address information engagement issues across the board? It is reasonable to assume that the NSC has a Strategic Communications representative and it is clear that the Press is a critical component of the Homeland Security Council.

At issue is how information will be crafted and distributed under this new approach. The Department of State is the lead for Public Diplomacy, but often lacks the resources and reach to exert information influence in many parts of the world where conflicts exist. On the domestic front, Department of Homeland Security will work with the Federal Emergency Management Administration (FEMA) and coordinate incident response using the National Incident Management System (NIMS). Neither of these two organizations have the robust resources that DOD has to deploy under the kind of exceptionally adverse conditions that would exist after major natural disasters or terrorist attacks.

It would appear then the some real work needs to be done to fold DOD resources into the NSC/Homeland Security mix. This work entails more than the development of contingency plans, but has to include a modicum of training for PSYOP and PAO personnel and will have to run across Active, Reserve and National Guard Forces.

Furthermore, the kinds of holistic responses that may be required may also need to employ contingency commercial resources that need to be identified and trained beforehand as well.

Given that DOD is still working out the kinks of how PSYOP and PAO will work together, watching the new and improved NSC unfold will be interesting. Let’s hope the equipping, planning and training takes place before any negative incidents.

PSYOP By Walking Around

Many of you are familiar with the technique “Management By Walking Around”. Essentially it is a style of leadership where the manager learns ground truth through conversation and observation by walking among his workers. I was having a bit of trouble figuring out what to post this week while I’m up here in Idaho grandchild and grand dog sitting.

After delivering my charges to their various assignments this morning, I decided that a little PT (Physical Training) was a good start. Since my knees no longer allow me to run very much I figured a walk to ‘town’ for breakfast was in order. I’ve never clocked the distance, but I think it’s about 1 ½ miles each way.
While I’m no mentalist, I am able to observe and analyze what I see. On my way the first item of interest was that the school crossing guard at the elementary school was a Native American – not common in Silicon Valley, but certainly so up here. Next I noticed that even this little town (population 4,000) has a 9 hole golf course even though the season must be relatively short.

When I arrived at my usual breakfast spot I noticed a couple of groups of Caucasians (or as we used to say in New York, coffee klatches). One group had about 8 ladies in their 50s – 70s, a second was about 10 men ranging in ages from late 50s up. Yesterday I learned that the local soda fountain (yes it really is a soda fountain) has sociologically assigned seats in the morning as well. Apparently the breakfast group is a local institution.

On my way back from breakfast I stopped into a Panderia where the signs were only in Spanish. I’m a bread and pastry lover so it made sense for me to explore. Bread and cookies are baked daily (bought 2 for my guests) and viernes is sale day with 3 cookies or bread items (except jalapeño rolls) for the price of two. I also noticed a woman in her early 40s holding a Neflix envelope.

My point in the travelogue is that there is no substitute for being on the ground. Direct communication to local groups is a critical tactical PSYOP task/skill. In this case my limited walkabout would have yielded information about when and where to meet a number of groups almost simultaneously. It also gave me some insight into language (I had to remember what day of the week is sale day), ethnicticities, and media .

This type of analysis is relevant whether in a rural village or a city block and is the foundation of building confidence with the local population.

Bad News And Commanders

Getting hit in the media can sometimes have more long term negative effects than physical casualties. The recent credibility debacle arising from airstrikes in Afghanistan is disturbing on many levels and a very good – bad example.

First of all CDR, especially senior ones, should know that, unlike wine or chicken soup – bad news does not get better with age. CDR should also know that sooner or later the ‘truth’ will come out. Consequently it makes sense to know where your bombs are landing and to be ready to admit when things going awry.

Commercial Public Relations (PR) experts will advise to get out in front of the event and take the moral high ground. Admit what happened, take responsibility, describe how you will help to set things right and then detail the steps you are taking to make sure it won’t happen again.

Of course this has to be in the context of not giving the enemy the feeling that you are abandoning the weapons systems and conveying that you won’t hesitate to bring air power to the fight whenever necessary.

Can Disinformation be Credible PSYOP?

Today’s Asian Times on line is featuring an article: “Disinformation flies as US raises Iran bar” (http://atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/JB21Ak01.html). The article talks about the informational tug of war between the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) and the US efforts to insure that Iran is the target of a new round of UN Sanctions. According to the author of the article: “a source close to the IAEA has called the US media reports "misleading". The source said: "Without going into the intelligence we may or may not have received, I can say that in my view, these news reports were misleading.”

At issue in today’s post is to offer a bit of analysis methodology to assess effect this ‘exposure’ of the alleged misleading nature of information provided will impact the battle for mindshare over the issue.

I’ve been often been accused of being a funny person, one who if life’s path were different, might have been a professional comedian. As a result, over time I have told people that “the best stuff is never made up”. This principle holds just as true in PSYOP as in comedy because the most effective PSYOP is the truth.

Another truth is that people believe what they want to believe. They tend to give more credibility to statements that prove their position than to efforts to discredit their position or change their mind. Consequently when information comes out that has in tainted in a credible way, that information is more likely to be disbelieved than it is to be considered by people holding opinions contra to that position.

The article author’s position is that Iran is within its rights to engage in nuclear ‘research’ and that the “IAEA must insulate itself from the disinformation campaign against Iran that has by all indications gone into a higher gear as we draw closer to the upcoming meeting of the IAEA’s board of governors, and it must ignore the intensifying American lobbying efforts and those of its junior partners such as France (at a recent meeting of France’s President Nicolas Sarkozy and the IAEA chief, Mohammad ElBaradei, the IAEA was urged to "stay firm" on Iran).”

Let’s look at the PSYOP/IO problem here. The article quotes an alleged source within the IAEA. The source is never named. The main thrust of the article is to reinforce the pro-Iranian position of the author. The messages are:
1. The US and its allies are trying to improperly influence the IAEA.
2. They are employing bad data (intelligence purportedly obtained from an unreliable source – stolen laptop) to do so.
3. The IAEA must remain above this sort of chicanery.
4. Iran is within its rights.

Some questions arise:
1. How credible/important is the Asia Times on-line in the information picture?
2. Who reads the Asia Times?
a. Direct Audience
b. Media that would parrot their position
c. Infuencers
3. What efforts (if any) should be made to counter this article?
I’m not going to offer responses here, but will strongly suggest that analysis like this is an important mission and that a “corporate” repository of the analysis, along with the responses and a tracking of their effects needs to be as much a part of the PSYOP arsenal as the loudspeaker.