This is an important TAT for voters to understand, especially that we are already being bombarded with election news. What prompted this article was a REUTERS article regarding what I believe to be a key factor in misunderstanding polling. My longtime experience in wielding influence to support US national security, until I retired from the US Army in 2015, is what gives me the insight to offer to all of you. This includes my current position as the VP at Narrative Strategies, a US Think and Do Tank specializing in the core of all influence, narrative.
Again another thoughtful article. Your points are well taken on the fallibility of polling data. If the pollsters had been correct in 2016 we would now be more than halfway through Hillary Clinton's second term in office.
Your concerns about the NATSEC community making a hash of narrative and strategic influence are well founded. I have my own tales to tell on this topic but since I don't want a visit by the FBI I will refrain from comment. Suffice it to say that this latest serving of bureaucratic Bouillabaisse reminds me of the axiom that the best way to kill a good idea is to take it to a meeting.
Thank you, my friend. Yes, it is frustrating when voters, media and politicians bounce from poll to poll, hanging all of their hopes on numbers that do not consider the type of details you or I might.
As expected, you applied the perfect quote... especially at our former place of effort.
I do suspect that my pointed and informed criticism of the domestic and oconus failings of our community, may have annoyed the wrong folks. My visit was right after a very pointed commentary of the domestic entities. Could be coincidence or...
What is truly depressing is the historical reality that one of the best examples of the USG mastering the art of strategic influence occurred under the leadership of George Creel and the Committee on Public Information in 1917 during the Woodrow Wilson administration. And that was when high speed communications were the telegraph and carrier pigeons!
Paul,
Again another thoughtful article. Your points are well taken on the fallibility of polling data. If the pollsters had been correct in 2016 we would now be more than halfway through Hillary Clinton's second term in office.
Your concerns about the NATSEC community making a hash of narrative and strategic influence are well founded. I have my own tales to tell on this topic but since I don't want a visit by the FBI I will refrain from comment. Suffice it to say that this latest serving of bureaucratic Bouillabaisse reminds me of the axiom that the best way to kill a good idea is to take it to a meeting.
Thank you, my friend. Yes, it is frustrating when voters, media and politicians bounce from poll to poll, hanging all of their hopes on numbers that do not consider the type of details you or I might.
As expected, you applied the perfect quote... especially at our former place of effort.
I do suspect that my pointed and informed criticism of the domestic and oconus failings of our community, may have annoyed the wrong folks. My visit was right after a very pointed commentary of the domestic entities. Could be coincidence or...
What is truly depressing is the historical reality that one of the best examples of the USG mastering the art of strategic influence occurred under the leadership of George Creel and the Committee on Public Information in 1917 during the Woodrow Wilson administration. And that was when high speed communications were the telegraph and carrier pigeons!