# CFCWO on facebook?



## Trueblue (30 Jan 2011)

http://www.facebook.com/home.php?#!/pages/Canadian-Forces-Chief-Warrant-Officer/130099637055330?v=wall


Assuming this is legit,

I thought the CF had a clear stand on Canadian forces members having facebooks that clearly depict yourself as a service member?

In my short career I have already have several of the, "if you have facebook the terrorists will hack you and kill your family" briefs.


----------



## Strike (30 Jan 2011)

*There*'s a difference between having a personal account and having a page.  CFB Petawawa and LFWA have *their* own pages.  I'm sure *there* are others as well.

If this is legit though I hope he has someone looking his posts over before he puts them out *there*, at least to watch spelling and grammar.  Seems to have missed it on this one.


----------



## OldSolduer (30 Jan 2011)

Trueblue said:
			
		

> http://www.facebook.com/home.php?#!/pages/Canadian-Forces-Chief-Warrant-Officer/130099637055330?v=wall
> 
> 
> Assuming this is legit,
> ...


That is a whole lot of clap trap. I've never heard of that....plus it an illegal order, plus it's impossible to enforce.


----------



## cn (30 Jan 2011)

We've had the "be careful of what you put on your facebook page..." lectures, which also go hand-in-hand with the "you are a serving member, conduct yourselves as such, even when not in uniform..." talks which is common sense (for most).

But many soldiers have profile pictures, whole picture albums and such that displays themselves as a service member.  

As long as it does not breach any security.


----------



## Trueblue (30 Jan 2011)

Jim Seggie said:
			
		

> That is a whole lot of clap trap. I've never heard of that....plus it an illegal order, plus it's impossible to enforce.



Yeah I wasn't agreeing with those "briefs" I mentioned, just using it to get my point across about the CF's stance on facebook pages.


----------



## Armymedic (30 Jan 2011)

Not allowing CF members to access social media is an illegal order because it would be counter to the Charter freedoms of expression and association.

OPSEC aside, the CF (we) discourage too much info because as any good int guy will tell you, every little tidbit will help finish the picture puzzle.


----------



## armyvern (30 Jan 2011)

Trueblue said:
			
		

> Yeah I wasn't agreeing with those "briefs" I mentioned, just using it to get my point across about the CF's stance on facebook pages.



I've attended a few of these 'briefs' in my time ... including two for the current TF Afg pers working up to deploy.

In all of those briefings, I have yet to hear a "you can't have a facebook account". What I have heard was that "thou shalt not speak on your facebook/social media *AS* a CF member or on behalf of the CF; nor shalt thou post OPSEC information (such as your chalk timings/dates etc) or OPSEC photgraphs onto those social networking sites. Thou shall also post only within your lanes and scope of work while on those sites."  Exactly the same message that we have had for years regarding media dealings. Makes perfect sense to me.


----------



## Navalsnpr (30 Jan 2011)

Task Force Kandahar even has a FB site.


----------



## Snaketnk (30 Jan 2011)

The problem arises when Junior/Senior NCOs mis understand that very reasonable policy and take it to extremes. I've seen a sergeant order all of his troops to remove any picture of them in uniform from facebook, to keep them out of the hands of the taliban. Of course, said sergeant had no way to enforce this rule as he didn't even have facebook... or the internet by the sounds of it.

Unfortunately, many of the sane directives that are passed on get distorted by ignorant/uniformed individuals.


----------



## Trueblue (30 Jan 2011)

Snaketnk said:
			
		

> The problem arises when *Junior/Senior NCOs* mis understand that very reasonable policy and take it to extremes. I've seen a sergeant order all of his troops to remove any picture of them in uniform from facebook, to keep them out of the hands of the taliban. Of course, said sergeant had no way to enforce this rule as he didn't even have facebook... or the internet by the sounds of it.



You're right, only an NCM could act that way  :


Anyways, I wasn't implying the CF had a no facebook stance, what I have been told on several briefs;

"Never use any social networking site that can identify you as a member of the CF"

Now if this is an actual threat, not saying it is, this facebook page now pretty much flags every person who "likes" it, or posts on it a member of the CF.

disclaimer once again: I don't agree/attempt to enforce the CF stance on facebook, just thought it was odd that they would be creating pages like this.


----------



## Shamrock (30 Jan 2011)

Trueblue said:
			
		

> I thought the CF had a clear stand on Canadian forces members having facebooks that clearly depict yourself as a service member?



Apparently, it does.  Take this as "The standard you must achieve is the standard I have demonstrated."


----------



## HavokFour (30 Jan 2011)

Trueblue said:
			
		

> You're right, only an NCM could act that way  :
> 
> 
> Anyways, I wasn't implying the CF had a no facebook stance, what I have been told on several briefs;
> ...



Not exactly.


----------



## armyvern (31 Jan 2011)

Trueblue said:
			
		

> You're right, only an NCM could act that way  :
> 
> 
> Anyways, I wasn't implying the CF had a no facebook stance, what I have been told on several briefs;
> ...



Again, I'll say: _*I've never heard any such thing *_in briefings I attended. So will you PLEASE cease and DESIST with the erroneous "the CF's stance on facebook" ramblings. Always though a "do not post as if you speak on behalf of the CF."

Oh, and I just "liked" the CFCWO's page. I have pics of me in uniform in an album. I post there as "me", not as a member of, or on behalf of, the CF.


----------



## daftandbarmy (4 Feb 2011)

I guess this finally dispells the myth that the RSM cannot have 'friends'.


----------



## Arctic Acorn (4 Feb 2011)

I think this is a pretty keen idea, and I applaud the CFCWO (or at least the smart cookie in his staff for proposing it). 

It at least sets an example for what is acceptable on Facebook (though I'd hate to be in the room when Private Bloggins tries to helpfully explain to NCO so-and-so why his Facebook Account is _verboten_ when the CFCWO's isn't). 

It also gives him an additional platform to get his point across...which today seems to translate to, "My wife makes me do stuff on my day off!"


----------



## Sf2 (5 Feb 2011)

Folks, 

Its probably just a recruiting/awareness measure in order to reach out to the digitally enhanced population.

Even CANSOFCOM and JTF2 have their own Facebook page.

This just isn't some guy's page posting "hey look at me".


----------



## Trueblue (5 Feb 2011)

Once again my point is being missed entirely.

My message was this;


We have been told that having ourselves easily identifiable as service members on facebook is dangerous for ourselves and our families.

This page easily identifies hundreds of facebookers as members of the CF, thus making them easy "targets".


----------



## Kiwi99 (5 Feb 2011)

But according to the Liberals and the NDP there are no taliban, so whats the issue.  Alas, wouldn't it be nice to have a few show up at the door so you could shoot them from the comfort of your own home, while making breakfast or something.

Look, there are plenty of dick-heads out there that think they make the rules for everything, regardless of rank.  Officers and NCOs, I am sure, have told their soldiers not to use facebook or twitter or something else.  Why?  because they are idiots.

I think it;s great that CF members get out there on social media and the such.  One of the main reasons I have heard for lack of support for the mission in Afghanistan is simply that people dont know what we are doing there, that theres not enough information about what the troops are accomplishing.  Thats our fault.  Social media is a good way to start fixing that.


----------



## dangerboy (5 Feb 2011)

Trueblue said:
			
		

> Once again my point is being missed entirely.
> 
> My message was this;
> 
> ...



Where do you get these briefings?  The only thing I have ever been told is don't but OPSEC info and photos up.  Never been told don't have facebook as Kiwi99 has stated it Facebook is a great medium to get information out to people in new ways.  Gone are the days of only getting news and info from the newspaper and TV's and the CF has realized that that is way we have this page and many units have pages.


----------



## Trueblue (5 Feb 2011)

Kiwi99 said:
			
		

> But according to the Liberals and the NDP there are no taliban, so whats the issue.  Alas, wouldn't it be nice to have a few show up at the door so you could shoot them from the comfort of your own home, while making breakfast or something.
> 
> Look, there are plenty of dick-heads out there that think they make the rules for everything, regardless of rank.  Officers and NCOs, I am sure, have told their soldiers not to use facebook or twitter or something else.  Why?  because they are idiots.
> 
> I think it;s great that CF members get out there on social media and the such.  One of the main reasons I have heard for lack of support for the mission in Afghanistan is simply that people dont know what we are doing there, that theres not enough information about what the troops are accomplishing.  Thats our fault.  Social media is a good way to start fixing that.




I agree completely.

On the note of "people making their own rules.", I have received the exact same brief, by two separate Base/wing security officers stating the same things I.E. "If you make yourself known as a CF member on facebook, the Taliban can find your family."

I have friends on bases Canada-wide who have received similar briefs I assumed everyone got these CF-wide.



			
				dangerboy said:
			
		

> Where do you get these briefings?  The only thing I have ever been told is don't but OPSEC info and photos up.  Never been told don't have facebook as Kiwi99 has stated it Facebook is a great medium to get information out to people in new ways.  Gone are the days of only getting news and info from the newspaper and TV's and the CF has realized that that is way we have this page and many units have pages.



Nowhere has anyone implied anything about being told we were not allowed to have facebook, I have been told several times "you shouldn't make yourself known on facebook as a member of Canadian Forces."

Whether this is an actual policy, or just IT security officers speaking out their ass, I obviously can't say.

Also, this has been taught at CFLRS St-jean (at least back in 08)


----------



## Takeniteasy (5 Feb 2011)

I think at the end of the day you make a decision as to what kind of information you are willing to share and what will others do with the information they know about you. You can google Armed Forces Council and find complete career profiles of each and every senior leader listed with a picture, there for anyone to see. You can find out alot with just a first name if you try different search criteria and action verbs.. I know I am not the first to be creative in using the internet to get information I want, I dont speak french but I use certain french words to find things easily.

Andrew


----------



## dangerboy (5 Feb 2011)

Here is a CANFORGEN about the subject:



> CANFORGEN 136/06 CDS 050/06 011318Z SEP 06
> GUIDANCE ON BLOGS AND OTHER INTERNET COMMUNICATIONS - CF OPERATIONS AND ACTIVITIES
> UNCLASSIFIED
> 
> ...


----------



## MedCorps (5 Feb 2011)

My CSM has some fun with this.  About once a week he finds some member of the unit / health service / CF who is a goof ball on facebook (or sometimes other places) and posts a copy of the page in the photocopy room with a witty comment for all to see. 

Since he has started doing this about a year ago he has come up with some pretty wild stuff an made some pretty funny comments. Since he has started this the number of unit members who have appeared on the wall of shame have dropped to almost none (less one recently from Lavalife).  

It also gives me incentive once an awhile to stick my head into the photocopier room on the way to the washroom to see what witty, oft slightly off colour comments he has made in his recent wall posts. 

MC


----------



## Shamrock (5 Feb 2011)

Your CSM is clearly in violation of the no fun in the workplace act.


----------



## Sf2 (5 Feb 2011)

Trueblue said:
			
		

> Once again my point is being missed entirely.
> 
> My message was this;
> 
> ...



Whoever gave this briefing is wrong.  You're saying that you are not allowed to identify yourself as military on Facebook?  What about newpapers, magazines that have online content?  Those are just as easily accessed as FACEBOOK.  Now no one is allowed to appear in any media whatsoever stating that they are a service member?  If that's the case, there are ALOT of people in trouble.

Heck, maybe I shouldn't have run with that Olympic Torch last year...them Taliban are onto me!!!


----------



## Alea (5 Feb 2011)

SF2 said:
			
		

> Whoever gave this briefing is wrong.



Hi SF2,

Maybe it's not so wrong after all if we consider what is written 2 posts above yours.

I am not in the military but I find it makes sense that everyone should be careful with what they post or make public in any kind of forum, meeting sites, Facebooks and other when they wear the uniform. 
I saw a military man on Facebook who posted a picture of himself in uniform and is "seaking discreet encounters"... when I saw that, I couldn't help but thinking to myself that it does not show a good image of the CF.
I also know someone who, while being in Afghanistan, posted all kinds of pictures of himself, his colleagues, army material including names of the places where said photos were taken (wouldn't this give some kind of hints of the positions of certain troops??) etc... etc... When I asked him if he could get in trouble for posting such "infos" accessible to everyone, he replied that it was not a problem at all and that he'd never been told anything about it. I then thought to myself that: "either I know nothing about nothing" but as a civilian... I logically thought that it just seemed wrong!

I used to work for an international bank as an Executive Administrative and had to take part in very confidentials meetings to assist some of the Vice-presidents who I worked for... from the beginning of the mandate, it was clearly said to me that I should avoid being part of sites like Facebook... I then erased my page. That was the end of Facebook for me and I have absolutely no regret since.

A poster stated earlier that "_at the end of the day you make a decision as to what kind of information you are willing to share and what will others do with the information they know about you_". I tend to agree with this and I would also add that when occupying such a role in a society (being part of the military), should come with it a strong sense of responsibility about the image that is being projected of the CF through its members. 

That is just my personnal thought 

Alea


----------



## Sf2 (5 Feb 2011)

Alea,

I agree, kinda.  

I am of the opinion that sure, put yourself out there as a service member.  Its not a secret to anyone.  The problem is when people start posting pictures of "here I am in this place, with this company, doing this kind of stuff...."  That's where the line is.

Sure, some people need to take more serious measures based on their job, and that's fine, but most of the time, those guys get it.  But average joe blow doesn't need to keep their military status hush hush.  How are you supposed to hide your military status if you live in the PMQ's?  Hell, go to the Warehouse on a friday night and watch all the dog tags flop around on the dance floor.  As pathetic and humorous as that may be, there's no harm done.  Its when people start posting names, places, and ops...that's the problem.

Like they say, OPSEC is an art.....


----------



## aesop081 (5 Feb 2011)

SF2 said:
			
		

> Its when people start posting names, places, and ops...that's the problem.



Even then, it still depends. Hard to tell a guy that he breached OPSEC saying he was at location X doing job Y when it is in a news release on the Canada Command website ( for example).


----------



## aesop081 (5 Feb 2011)

Back to the CFCWO......

Facebook and other social media is what kids these days understand. I see it every day with my own children. If we are, as CF leaders, to connect with younger members now just getting in, we have to have a presence in social media.


----------



## Towards_the_gap (5 Feb 2011)

I've always told my guys that if it's in the public doman already, then not to worry. Specifics including obj names, dates, grids, or specifics about recent events are a no-no. Other than that post away.

People get all wrapped around the axle about persec, often times for nothing. Fact is unless you are SF, CIED, HUMINT or of a high enough rank, you generally aren't worth the trouble. I remember once hearing during a PERSEC brief that someone was shocked that another soldier had put photos of himself frapping charges on facebook. Now I'm no counter-intelligence guru but I'm pretty sure AQ knows we use det cord to initiate charges....


As for the CFCWO being on facebook......hmm to me that site just looks a bit sad.


----------



## PuckChaser (5 Feb 2011)

It also sets an example for CF members to follow on Facebook. CANFORGENs with strong language are nice and all, but if the CFCWO has his own page, and gives us an exemplar..... what's that leadership principle, something by example?  :nod:


----------



## Sf2 (5 Feb 2011)

That's what I tried to say in my original post.

I'm sure its just a measure to "reach out" to the digital age.  Nothing wrong with the CFCWO's page.


----------



## Towards_the_gap (5 Feb 2011)

I don't know. I agree with the 'set the standard' argument, and 'touching the digital generation'...


....but I would have 400% more respect for the CFCWO if, instead of the stock photo that you see in building foyers across this great land, he had a picture of him piss drunk, pair of underwear on his head, in a Hawaiian shirt in a karaoke bar in Tehran.

If you're gonna be that high up and have a facebook page, at least have a bit of character with it. Don't put pics of you doing hardwood flooring up.


----------



## OldSolduer (5 Feb 2011)

I'd have a pic of me up hangin with the troops.....with a Bud or JD.


----------



## dogger1936 (6 Feb 2011)

Towards_the_gap said:
			
		

> I don't know. I agree with the 'set the standard' argument, and 'touching the digital generation'...
> 
> 
> ....but I would have 400% more respect for the CFCWO if, instead of the stock photo that you see in building foyers across this great land, he had a picture of him piss drunk, pair of underwear on his head, in a Hawaiian shirt in a karaoke bar in Tehran.
> ...



What do you want? Pics of him doing drill in a mirror? Imagine that a leader trying to be personal. I'm a senior NCO and actually had the gull to let my troops call me by my first name...where is this army going? Hard wood floor.....soooo unprofessional.


----------



## 421_434_226 (6 Feb 2011)

Maybe it is just me but would we not be easier for the Taliban to just follow a random member home from pretty much any base in Canada. As opposed to tracking you down through Facebook.


----------



## George Wallace (6 Feb 2011)

Gizmo 421 said:
			
		

> Maybe it is just me but would we not be easier for the Taliban to just follow a random member home from pretty much any base in Canada. As opposed to tracking you down through Facebook.



Visa's, Airline Tickets, accomondations, a vehicle, living expenses, for how many Taliban to come to Canada to do this?

This is much easier: Killing with Keyboards


----------



## armyvern (6 Feb 2011)

George Wallace said:
			
		

> Visa's, Airline Tickets, accomondations, a vehicle, living expenses, for how many Taliban to come to Canada to do this?
> 
> This is much easier: Killing with Keyboards



Don't be too quick to assume such - too many Canadians already believe that they are very snug in their beds in this Nation with nary a care in the world; went out for dinner the other night at a friends place ... just two down from our very own recently-arrested Edmonton terrorists' place. The Taliban isn't the only threat and they don't need to be here themselves, they need only a source that is ... and there are.

I should have snapped a pic of his (non-Canadian) capitol-city named licence plate for my crackbook album.


----------



## Kat Stevens (6 Feb 2011)

There are plenty of homegrown, foaming at the mouth, fanatics to carry out this type of thing.


----------



## 421_434_226 (6 Feb 2011)

I would think that it would take the same amount of people to place a random military member and their family in danger, who had identified themselves through a social network as it would to place that person outside of a base and follow a random member home.
My use of the word "easier" was the wrong choice, I meant to compare the differences between identifying yourself on Facebook and just getting into your uniform and going to work.
To get back to the original topic the CWO's Facebook profile I think it is excellent and may even "like" it.


----------



## George Wallace (6 Feb 2011)

ArmyVern said:
			
		

> I should have snapped a pic of his (non-Canadian) capitol-city named licence plate for my crackbook album.



We have had this discussion already, about the amount of metadata that is encrypted into your digital photos.  It has been shown that with a little work by one person with the correct tools, easily available, that data can place the exact location of the photograph.  Think I'll revert back to 35mm and 106mm film.   ;D

PERSEC and OPSEC are fine words to throw out there, but the majority of Canadians, CF members included, have no real idea of what they are placing on the internet.  Few worry about their IP address being broadcast.  Many don't see any harm in posting personal data.  Few think that their computers can be hacked.  The "Tinfoil Hat" types may be more realistic than those who call them crackpots.


----------



## armyvern (6 Feb 2011)

George Wallace said:
			
		

> We have had this discussion already, about the amount of metadata that is encrypted into your digital photos.  It has been shown that with a little work by one person with the correct tools, easily available, that data can place the exact location of the photograph.  Think I'll revert back to 35mm and 106mm film.   ;D
> 
> PERSEC and OPSEC are fine words to throw out there, but the majority of Canadians, CF members included, have no real idea of what they are placing on the internet.  Few worry about their IP address being broadcast.  Many don't see any harm in posting personal data.  Few think that their computers can be hacked.  The "Tinfoil Hat" types may be more realistic than those who call them crackpots.



I'd never argue different, but your insinuance that a terrorist (hint: they ain't _all_ Taliban either) would actually have to travel "to" Canada (& the logistics of such) to follow someone home from work is way off -- they are *already* here; in actuality (evidenced by the latest arrest), living within 10kms of military installations. Not very tough logistically now is it?


----------



## aesop081 (6 Feb 2011)

George Wallace said:
			
		

> easily available, that data can place the exact location of the photograph.  Think I'll revert back to 35mm and 106mm film.   ;D



Then again, that is only if your camera / device is GPS enabled. None of mine are, so i dont worry about that.



> PERSEC and OPSEC are fine words to throw out there,



They are not just thrown around by careless people. They are also thrown around by people who like absolutes and use those things to justify bogus direction and decisions.

There is nothing inherently wrong identifying yourself as a CF member, in social media or otherwise. The CF official website already identifies me as such, with several pictures and video, clearly shows what i do for a living and where to find me. The mandated sticker on my car identifies me as a CF member, the people at H&R block know i am a CF member, etc....

In the end, i dont see how this has anything to do with the thread subject. There was never any order saying " do not use facebook" so the CFCWO has one......BFD.


----------



## OldSolduer (6 Feb 2011)

Jim Seggie said:
			
		

> I'd have a pic of me up hangin with the troops.....with a Bud or JD.



even if some of the troops are women!!


----------

