UPDATED: Cantigny Conference/Comments
I’ve just returned home from a four-day trip to Chicago. I spent three days at the McCormick-Tribune Foundation’s “Media and the Military” conference. The Foundation held the conference at COL Robert McCormick’s former family estate, Cantigny. McCormick named it after the battle of Cantigny in World War One. He served in the 1st Infantry Division and briefly commanded an artillery battalion that supported the attack on Cantigny.
[Note: The Tribune in McCormick-Tribune Foundation is the Chicago Tribune newspaper.]
Conference attendees included the Wall St Journal, USA Today, Dow Jones, Army Times, Bloomberg News, ABC, CNN, etc, and a few freelancers (me, for example). The military attendees were drawn from several major commands. The senior officer present was a general I’d worked for in Iraq. Cantigny Conferences operate on a not for attribution basis, in order to promote discussion, so I’m not including any names other than mine and former CNN State Dept correspondent, Ralph Begleiter. Ralph served as the conference moderator and did a fine job give the mix of personalities, experiences, and organizations. He now teaches at the University of Delaware.
The conference hosts asked me to fill out the evaluation form. Here’s one question, and my answer: “What do you hope other conferees learned or will do differently as a result of the conference?”
My response, penned on the return flight from Chicago to Texas: “We live in a global information environment. There are no boundaries. Be conscious of that.”
A couple of weeks ago I talked with a military friend of mine — an officer who was not at the conference– about that subject. He told me that he thinks DOD and the government are just beginning to learn what a planet-wide “no boundary” information space means to policy, plans, and oeprations. I think the legacy media may be a bit behind DOD’s learning curve, though I certainly encountered many reporters and editors who are grappling with that new strategic fact.
I also recommended the next conference spend more time on new technology and alternative media. I suggested the Foundation hold a blogging and/or Internet communication conference.
I also had breakfast Thursday morning with mil-blogger supreme “Blackfive.” We had a fine chat, and I’ll leave it at that.
Comments will return today. And posts will be frequent, starting Saturday.
UPDATE: Comment 2: There will be a Cantigny conference report issued by The McCormick-Tribune Foundation. When that comes out in a couple of months I’ll address the report. The conference is not-for-attribution (that’s the deal when you agree to attend).
Glad to see you’re back and safe. It will be very interesting to see how things with the media turn out. Given the recent piece by Greg Mitchell in Editor and Publisher, it looks like there is going to be one heck of a fight coming up.
Comment by HaroldHutchison — 8/26/2005 @ 11:29 am
I was disappointed in this post. The link had been to a discussion of the media and the military. Instead, I found a lightweight travelogue and kudos to a moderator. How does the media view the military? How effectively does the military interact with the media? Is there a substantive origin of the apparent antipathy towards and distrust of the military exhibited by the bulk of the so-called mainstream media? An exploration of these questions and the issues inevitably raised by them would be fascinating. Is there any chance we’ll see something like that? If so, would you send me a link? If not, would you reply to this note? Thank you, and Best regards, JP
Comment by Jay Pittard — 8/26/2005 @ 3:21 pm
Jay, I would say that the Cantigny Conferences have a long history of publishing what the ‘findings’ were. They provide them free for the asking. Check their website: http://www.rrmtf.org/citizenship/currentseries.htm You may have to hunt and peck a bit, but I’ve found valuable references for my students, at no cost, not even shipping.
Comment by Kathianne — 8/26/2005 @ 11:11 pm
Any comments on the action over at PressThink? First a closed thread, then an open one. I think it’s been one of the most interesting exchanges I’ve seen in a while…
Comment by Neuro-conservative — 8/27/2005 @ 1:13 am
The “not for attribution” policy is a good one, I think. It allows for a frank discussion of issues between the military and the press. That could be very useful, although given some comments in the press, I have to wonder if “wall-to-wall counseling” has been contemplated.
Comment by HaroldHutchison — 8/29/2005 @ 9:43 am