Silence meant security: Overcoming WWII Propaganda
A few weeks back, I was the guest of honor at a dinner that could only be described as “surreal”. Gathered around the table were 10 members of the Intelligence Community, representing organizations like CIA, NSA, NGA, State, TSA and others.
One of our conversations was the parallels and connections between the cultures of today’s business and intelligence communities. In most corporations, secrecy, or perhaps the fear of publication seems to set the tone of the way most people inside a company approach the way they do their jobs.
If you look back to the 1930s (and certainly earlier), you will see most businesses taking a much more open approach. Most businesses didn’t fight against, but instead tried to work with their customers. From the general store in the west to the soda fountain downtown, business recognized and respected their customers. Word of Mouth ruled the day.
Then along comes World War II.
As the propaganda stated (and was repeated): “Silence means security“. Basically if you share anything having to do with anything involving the war effort, you’re putting your friends, family, and fellow citizens at risk.
After the war ended, the “Greatest Generation” was entering the workforce in droves. American post-war excitement and relative prosperity was driving an explosion of private industry. With little time to reflect on the ideas we’d formed about the transition from war culture to post-war culture, the “Silence means security” mantra was embraced beyond the war. Secrecy was unwittingly embraced as a keystone mantra of the new business culture.
The Baby Boomer generation was raised with this new reality, not realizing it wasn’t just Standard Operating Procedure. So it’s no surprise that we’re having to overcome a culture of secrecy, and it’s no surprise that the Social Web is coming to light at a time when the Boomers are beginning to retire and turn the reigns over to Gen X (and Gen Y too, for that matter).
If you’re finding this hard to swallow, check out this excerpt from the original Loose Lip flier:
SILENCE MEANS SECURITY — If violation of protective measures is serious within written communications it is disastrous in conversations. Protect your conversation as you do your letters, and be even more careful. A harmful letter can be nullified by censorship; loose talk is direct delivery to the enemy.
If you come home during war your lips must remain sealed and your written hand must be guided by self-imposed censorship. This takes guts. Have you got them or do you want your buddies and your country to pay the price for your showing off. You’ve faced the battle front; its little enough to ask you to face this “home front.”
It gets even better. Look at the top 10 “prohibited subjects” from this document (emphasis mine):
- Don’t write military information of Army units — their location, strength,, materiel, or equipment.
- Don’t write of military installations.
- Don’t write of transportation facilities.
- Don’t write of convoys, their routes, ports (including ports of embarkation and disembarkation), time en route, naval protection, or war incidents occurring en route.
- Don’t disclose movements of ships, naval or merchant, troops, or aircraft.
- Don’t mention plans and forecasts or orders for future operations, whether known or just your guess.
- Don’t write about the effect of enemy operations.
- Don’t tell of any casualty until released by proper authority (The Adjutant General) and then only by using the full name of the casualty.
- Don’t attempt to formulate or use a code system, cipher, or shorthand, or any other means to conceal the true meaning of your letter. Violations of this regulation will result in severe punishment.
- Don’t give your location in any way except as authorized by proper authority. Be sure nothing you write about discloses a more specific location than the one authorized.
Sounds awfully familiar to Jeremiah’s “The 3 Impossible Conversations for Corporations“, doesn’t it?
Today, three generations later, we’re finally realizing that in business “Loose lips keep ships floating“, and that a return to traditional Word of Mouth marketing is a powerful force.
Related Entries
- Yes, Remarkable.
- The failings of that community thing
- BzzAgent and jumping sharks
- The difficulty of participation by the corporation
- The role of corporations in the Social Web
8 Responses to “Silence meant security: Overcoming WWII Propaganda”
Seems to me that the real key to keeping the ships afloat is open ears, but I agree that getting customers to talk with you means loosening the lips.
Jake,
Your post/research is fascinating. I had always just accepted that business in the U.S. favored closed/tight-lipped communication. Having recently read about WWII and the necessity for not talking openly, I can see why many of today’s leaders whose parents experienced WWII first hand were indoctrinated in this way of thinking.
Once again you are delivering value into my RSS inbox. Keep the great ideas and information coming.
Best,
Aaron (@astrout)
Really interesting observation. I had always attributed the distancing of corporations from their customers to mass media and the rise of Madison Avenue ad agencies to develop ‘mass communications’…and I still think that was a major influence. However, coming on the heels of the war, that distancing between corporations and their customers must have seemed acceptable to customers because of the highly secretive/secure environment during the war. Interesting - thanks for the post - and Aaron to passing it along!
Very insightful, Jake! I would go a step further, and say this history shows why Americans are so accepting of secrecy in government. People carried the “loose lips” mantra through the cold war, accepting government secrecy as necessary to “beat the Russians.”
Anyway, it wasn’t a political post, but I think the cold war secrecy aspect can’t be ignored for why this attitude has lasted 3 generations. The internet boom happened after the Berlin Wall fell, remember, and it wasn’t for lack of computer networks, there were plenty all through the late 70’s and 80’s.
Jake - Very cool post…I’m more curious how you came to have dinner with all these 007’s.
But on your point, I think this should also be a wake up call for many execs to abandon the war analogies in business. (Does The Art of War still need to be required reading for biz execs? I couldn’t get more than 1/2 way through it!).
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.
Not sure how I feel about this post. I don’t condone the secrecy that surrounds the war in Iraq, and I don’t condone corporate cover-ups. But the rationale behind these requests during WWII seems to be to be solid, not manipulative or secretly about PR. They really WERE trying to protect our nation’s security. And talking about operations really WAS dangerous to us.
I think it’s important to separate between when information is hidden because it will make the perpetrator look bad, and when information is hidden because it will hurt something important. I guess in the end I am not a fan of openness for openness’ sake, and I’d need to be convinced with a post more convincing than this one — which basically assumes the reader shares the writer’s views.