PR contest we are losing

http://counterterrorismblog.org/2007/05/battle_of_the_brands.php

'On May 14, at a conference sponsored by terrorism-risk insurer Lloyds, Sir Richard Dearlove, the former head of the Secret British Intelligence Service MI6, said the U.S. and UK had placed themselves in a "strategically weak" position due to having the wrong strategy against terrorism, and emphasized the importance of strengthening the counter-terrorism "brand" and of undermining the viability of Al Qaeda as a "brand."'

I hope very much that this is not the first outing for this analysis. Mark Steyn long ago floated the idea of the strong horse and the weak horse. In an asymmetric war, you have to know exactly where the battlegrounds are. Number one battleground is the mass media. The eyeballs of the rich nations are where the most important battles are fought and lost. I say, lost, because both the British and American governments don't seem to be in the game. They have not figured out that it just isn't enough to keep killing large numbers of the bad guys. You have to impress on the minds of all the young boys who are coming along that the bad guys are losers. They will be much less likely to join up. But there have been very few, very tentative efforts to out-PR Al-Qaeda and all the new Jihadis-on-the-block.

The expert, judicious use of PR doesn't seem to be something that comes easily to our governments. 'Shock and Awe' comes to mind. If 'Shock and Awe' is your goal, don't tell everybody first. Its a bit like stating that a joke is funny before you tell it- if it is, they didn't need the heads-up, and if it isn't you look like an idiot. America has the most effective and well-armed forces on the planet- but has the street cred of a little old granny with a walker. Superior firepower only matters if you have the will and the confidence to use it when the situation requires. Many of the comments in the public domain from current and ex-US Generals leave the distinct impression that America's firepower is in the hands of men who often don't believe in fighting for American interests or killing evil tyrants. In fact, its uncertain whether they believe US forces should defend America at all...

All round the world, people pick up this kind of information from the internet and make their own judgement about who is the genuinely strong horse. And judging by the steady stream of recruits feeding into Iraq from Syria and Jordan, thats not us. Who exactly is going to take our nations by the scruff of the neck and require an answer? Are we going to fight or are we going to pretend to fight? Because the strong horse is not necessarily the one doing none of the dying...