The Joint Special Operations University (JSOU) hosted strategist and author Dr. Peter Singer for a webinar discussion on the weaponization of social media. He talked about how social media has profoundly affected every area of human society and commerce and, by default, the institution of war.

The conversation is based on the book LikeWar: The Weaponization of Social Media by authors P.W. Singer and Emerson Brooking published in 2018. The book outlines how the internet is changing war and politics . . . and how war and politics are changing the internet. War, tech, and politics have blurred into a new kind of battle space that plays out in social media.

The online interview (and question and answer session) is hosted by JSOU’s Kerry Roberts. Roberts is a member of JSOU’s Strategic Studies Department. Dr. Peter Singer is a strategist with New America, author, and defense analyst.

Singer explains why he and Emerson Brooking wrote the book. The internet is now just over 50 years old. It started out as a tool for Pentagon scientists to communicate, then evolved into a commercial and social tool, and now is used by some as weapon of war and conflict.

**********

This video was recorded on April 21, 2020 and posted on YouTube by JSOU “Think JSOU” on August 18, 2020, one hour long.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sr6vn_OScL8&t=17s

LikeWar: The Weaponization of Social Media, by P.W. Singer and Emerson Brooking, 2018.
https://www.amazon.com/LikeWar-Weaponization-P-W-Singer/dp/0358108470/

Whats Wrong with ARSOF? Army Special Operations Forces or ARSOF has – according to one special operations officer (writing under a fictional name) –  been marginalized by other SOF elements (SEALs and JSOC) and has lost its way.

The author, in “Whats Wrong With ARSOF”, examines the current state of affairs for Special Forces, Civil Affairs, and Psychological Operations. These entities fall under the proponency of the U.S. Army Special Operations Command (USASOC). Other units also come under the command of USASOC – the 75th Ranger Regiment, 528th Sustainment Brigade, and the Special Operations Aviation Regiment (SOAR); but the author is directing his attention to SF, CA, and PSYOP.

He first states that “SF is king” and runs USASOC and the schoolhouse. According to the author CA and PSYOP are second class citizens and looked down upon by SF officers and NCOs. He cites recent attempts by SF to ‘off ramp’ CA to the conventional army.

Another of his points is the lack of strategic thinking on the part of SF officers. According to the author SF officers are tactically oriented and more Army than SF. (Hmmmm). This aspect of professional education, experience, and training limits the promotion potential for senior SF officers to command USSOCOM.

He makes some assertions about the formation of the 1st Special Forces Command and questions its usefulness. He brings up points about manning and resources and the effect of the command on improving promotion and command prospects of SF officers. In addition, the school house – or United States Army John F. Kennedy Special Warfare Center and School (USAJFKSWCS) does not escape his attention. Criticisms of “. . . entrenched civilians and terminal colonels awaiting retirement . . .” can be found in the article.

This is certainly an interesting read for those in the special operations community. It is the second in a series of four articles about U.S. special operations forces. The first “What’s Wrong With SOCOM?” was published on December 25, 2016.

So give “What’s Wrong With ARSOF?” a read. While I don’t agree with many of the author’s points he certainly comes out with some good conversation starters for morning PT or the late afternoon staff meeting. Published on December 27, 2016 by Small Wars Journal.