Wired News reported yesterday that new rules prevent Army soldiers, contractors and even civilian employees from blogging, sending personal email or other communication via the Internet without prior approval of their commanders. Before the regulations, which took effect April 19, military bloggers were encouraged to seek input from commanders before posting material “that might contain sensitive and/or critical information in a public forum.” but the new rule goes far beyond a common sense guideline intended to protect sensitive military information. It’s prior restraint, pure and simple. See Dadmanly’s blog for an interpretation fo the new regs from a military point of view.

If you’re interested at all in how the Iraq war looks from the point of view of people fighting it, you’ve probably read milblogs. If not, try Black Five and The Mudville Gazette. They offer insights and unvarnished assessments you simply can’t get from conventional media. The new Army regulations could well kill miliblogging.

But these regulations don’t merely affect bloggers: they potentially constrain anyone who sends email to friends and family, posts on MySpace, or uploads Flickr photos. You don’t have to be a blogger to be silenced by these onerous rules. Even if soldiers seek and receive clearance to communicate with the world back home, the requirement to clear every word, picture and YouTube video with a commander will undoubtedly have a chilling effect on speech by military personnel. Aside from the obvious free speech implications, such a heavy-handed regulation will surely do harm to the morale of Army members who have grown accustomed to expressing themselves via the Internet. According to the Wired story, military officials don’t anticipate scrutinizing every blog post and email. So it’s all or nothing. They could censor selectively if they wished to, or simply rule that all blogging is forbidding. And having such regulations in place makes it dead simple to silence soldiers who are critical of the Army.

To be sure, there are tactical plans and activities that should not be compromised via blog or email. The military has an interest in maintaining operational security. But these regulations go far beyond what’s necessary to do that.

-shelly

So, I’m next to feed the blog, and have been for a few days now. I started to riff on a South African’s rant about bloggers’ expectations of privacy. Then I wanted to weigh in on a New York Times story about the impact of literary blogs on the book review world. But by the time either was almost ready to post, they were old. For big businesses like IBM, a few hours amount to a nanosecond; in the real-time realm of the Internet, things seem stale in minutes.

One thing successful bloggers and podcasters all agree on is that the best Web-based publishers come up with original ideas or offer unique takes on well established ones. Everyone else tends to fall into the enormous “me too” category, producing content that’s already out there in one form or another. To avoid that trap, I’ll attempt to use my weekly appearance to offer a peek inside this magazine.

I’ve conducted quite a few interviews this week, and at the end of each, I’ve been asked either directly or indirectly how we’re handling the “feedback.” We’ve gotten a lot of encouraging comments and, of course, numerous nasty ones. One need only Google us to see examples of both. We’ve privately debated staffers’ different interpretations of the snarkier commentary. We’ve also begun acting on the more constructive criticism to improve on processes and policies.

Some of those improvements have been immediate; others won’t be realized by the reading and listening public for a couple of months. For example, we’ve had to adjust our publication dates to the first of the month due to printer and podcast producers’ schedules. That means the next issue will be out around June 1. Eager to see how the next issue’s received? If the content continues to meet the needs of a targeted, tempermental audience? If the naysayers eventually carry the day? Yeah, me too.

–Anne