Twitter is for civic journalists, not vegan terrorists

I don't pay much attention to U.S. Army Intelligence - in fact, I kind of hope the U.S. Army doesn't - because the old joke of military intelligence being an oxymoron certainly held true in a recent report from the Army's 304th Military Intelligence Battalion.The report discusses some examples of terrorist use and political use of mobile to Web and Web to mobile technologies and tactics. One of the focuses of the report is the microblogging tool Twitter.com.

Now, I've been maintaining a Twitter account for a while, and when I first read about this report, I literally LOL'd - although, surprisingly, I didn't bother to post a Tweet about it, but opted instead for a Facebook note.

At one point, the report concludes: "Twitter has also become a social activism tool for socialists, human rights groups, communists, vegetarians, anarchists, religious communities, atheists, political enthusiasts, hacktivists and others to communicate with each other and to send messages to broader audiences."

In case you're wondering what these sort of undesirables are sending to each other, here's a sampling of what I would expect to see on the social networking Web site:

- Socialists: "@Congress Way to go on the bailout, guys. That's up there with Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid for helping us advance our cause! :)"

- Human Rights Groups: "Anybody else read that OLLAS policy brief about human rights and immigrants in Nebraska? It's outrageous so little has been done!"

- Communists: "Nebraska voters, remember to write in Socialist Workers Party candidates @Róger Calero for president and @Alyson Kennedy for veep!"

- Vegetarians: "Sign up for the Thanksgiving Fabulous Fowl-Free Feast with the Nebraska Vegetarian Society at http://vegetarian.meetup.com/509/ -- GO VEG!"

- Anarchists: "Reading Robert Paul Wolff's 'In Defense of Anarchism' for Dr. Conces' social philosophy class. Definitely suggest you check it out."

- Religious Groups: "Everybody remember to come to The Rock's meeting at 7:24 p.m. in the Milo Bail's Dodge Room. (It's up on the third floor!)"

- Atheists: "Saw Bill Maher's 'Religulous' earlier. Best line: 'You don't have to pass an IQ test to be in the Senate though' (Sen. Mark Pryor, D-Ark.)"

- Political Enthusiasts: "I'm so excited about today's election. I'm going to be glued to http://omahanewspreelection.blogspot.com/ for UNO students' perspectives!"

- Hactivists: "I'm glad that Scott's not gotten any more harassing messages from Co$ after his column. We are Anonymous. We are Legion."

- Others: "My dog says: Bark. Bark bark. (Pause.) Bark. Bark. Bark bark. Bark. Bark bark bark. (Pause.) Bark. (Pause.) Bark bark bark. Bark."

The report also lists three example scenarios of terrorists or other "bad guys" making use of Twitter to hurt American interests: sending and receiving messages among terrorist cell members, detonating an explosive device and following a soldier's Tweets.

Let's take a quick look at these, though. For the first scenario, there are these things called text messages and instant messages. If the terrorists want to exchange messages in a public forum like Twitter rather than a private form like those, what's wrong with that (other than you can't violate any civil rights by an illegal wiretap?)

For the second example, cell phones are already extensively used to detonate explosives. Reading about roadside bombs in Iraq could have told these intelligence analysts that.

Lastly, if the Army is allowing soldiers to post Tweets but coming down on some of them who keep personal blogs, then perhaps their operating procedures do need some review.

The absurdity of the report aside, though, of course it's completely possible for terrorists to exploit tools like Twitter. What's interesting about this report isn't its middle-school quality research, it's the examples and rhetoric it uses.

Note, for instance, the list of dangerous individuals who might use Twitter - they include human rights advocates, vegetarians, religious communities and even political enthusiasts. These aren't criminals by any means, not that socialists, communists, anarchists or atheists are either.

In fact, the only group that really makes some sense in that list is hactivists, but the Army would do better to focus on exploring image boards like 4chan.org more rather than branching into the wide world of social networking tools.

Why did these groups make the list, then? They're all advocates for social change of one sort of another. They're all anti-status quo, and some of them exert effort - typically of the legal variety - to challenge the prevailing hegemony.

What's alarming to me, though, is that no effort was made to use some of the code phrases for these groups. There's no mention of "domestic terrorists," "eco-terrorists" or even "animal rights advocates," for example. It just says "vegetarian."

Another thing that's alarming about the report is its assertion that "Twitter was recently used as a counter-surveillance, command and control, and movement tool by activists at the Republic National Convention." The examples give of this seemingly paramilitary use of Twitter are:

- "Arrest teams are approaching seated protestors on Marion Bridge. Resisters are told they'll be met with force."

- "Protestors are now fighting back. First reports of violence now."

- "Western Ave. Bridge, west of capitol can be safely crossed."

- "City is on lockdown. Go to 14th and Jackson if you need held from tear gas pepper spray."

This doesn't sound like "counter-surveillance" or "command and control" messages to me. It sounds like civic journalism.

These messages have several basic journalistic values: impact, action, timeliness, proximity and conflict all come immediately to mind. These Tweets are an attempt at communicating valuable information to American citizens, not a communiqué between terrorist operatives.