It behooves citizens to understand the methods the government uses to communicate with the public. Government official communication needs to be on point and on topic, disseminated across the various agencies and officials who engage with the public, mostly via the news media.
This is both good and bad. Good because there are so many moving parts to government that messaging can easily get lost, diverted or become inaccurate as information is gathered, assessed, relayed and meanings assigned. Anyone who works in a large corporation is probably familiar with this situation. There is no sense in having communications if you cannot ensure the integrity of the information and messaging. Developing events will of course force changes in the messaging as new information develops. Thus new messages must be crafted for dispersement to the audience.
This can be bad because by its very nature of required rigidity it doesn’t allow for much free-thinking, reasonably contemplated and well intentioned as it may be, by the messengers. Press secretaries, official spokespeople, elected officials are expected to stay within the parameters of the government constructed message-narrative.
To keep public speakers in line with the correct messaging, “briefing cards” are given to those who speak to a public audience. Take a look at this example below obtained by The Black Vault regarding the government’s forthcoming UAP investigation program.
UAP Report to Congress May 17, 2021
Executive Summary
Public and news media interest in unidentified aerial phenomena (UAPs) remains high. DoD formally established a UAP Task Force (UAPTF), per the FY19 NDAA, on Aug. 4, 2020. The Senate Select Committee on Intelligence (SSCI) report attached to the FY21 Intelligence Authorization Act (signed into statute as part of the omnibus spending bill signed on Dec. 27, 2020) directed the Director of National Intelligence, in consultation with SECDEF, to submit a report to Congress on UAPs within 180 days of enactment. The SSCI report specifically mentions the UAPTF. Recently (@March 20-21), John Ratcliffe, former DNI, spoke with Fox News about the report, generating multiple queries asking for DoD comment on his claims in the interview. CBS “60 Minutes” aired a segment on May 16 on DoD’s efforts to examine UAPs.
Top Line Messages / Talking Points
We are aware of the report requirement, and the UAPTF team is actively working with the Office of the Director of National Intelligence on the report. I refer you to ODNI for anything else regarding the report.
We take reports of incursions into our airspace – by any aircraft, identified or unidentified – very seriously, and investigate each one. Safety (of our personnel) and security (of our operations) are of paramount concern.
To protect our people, maintain operational security and safeguard intelligence methods, we do no publicly discuss the details of the UAP observations, the task force or examinations.
Questions and Answers
Q. Has the Department found any evidence of extraterrestrial technology?
A. The examinations into incursions by UAPs are still ongoing; the Department does not comment on intelligence matters.
Q: Do you have any comment on the remarks made by John Ratcliffe to Fox News about the forthcoming UAP report?
A. As he was the former DNI, and ODNI has the lead on the UAP report, I refer you to ODNI.
Q. Why did you establish the UAPTF?
A. The Department of Defense established the UAPTF to improve its understanding of, and gain insight into, the nature and origins of UAP incursions into our training ranges and designated airspace. The Task Force is focused on a data-driven approach to identify the source of the incursions. We need data (from increased reporting by aviators, technical means, etc.) to analyze in order to understand and draw the appropriate conclusions and to make the appropriate recommendations to leadership. As we collect additional data, we expect to close the gap between identified and unidentified and avoid strategic surprise regarding adversary technology.
Q. Why did the Navy change its reporting guidelines on UAPs?
A. We are using a data-driven approach. Sometimes, there are phenomenon for which we don’t have sufficient data. We wanted to establish an environment where our force feels comfortable reporting all observations so we can collect data, make informed determinations, and address our findings.
Q. Can you tell us anything about what the UAPTF has found so far?
A. We do not comment on intelligence matters.
Q. Why can’t you tell us anything about UAPs or what the UAPTF is doing?
A. DoD does not provide information about operational or intelligence activities that would identify possible U.S. vulnerabilities.
Q. What budget does the UAPTF have?
A: As the lead agency, the U.S Navy identifies and uses appropriated defense funding to meet UAPTF requirements.
Additional Background Information (Not for Release)
Except for its existence, and the mission/purpose, virtually everything else about the UAPTF is classified, per the signed Security Classification Guide (SCG).
Additional Talking Points on the UAPTF
DOD has established a UAP task force to gain knowledge and insight into the nature and origins of UAP incursions into our training ranges and designated airspace.
The mission of the task force is to detect, analyze, and catalog UAPs that could potentially pose a threat to U.S national security.
The Department of Defense maintains numerous activities to collect data to build accurate operating pictures and inform decision-making. The UAPTF is another DOD tool that uses data to improve understanding of operating environments and support relevant policies. Previously, the services investigated UAP reports separately. The UAPTF provides an opportunity to better network and standardize those processes.
The mission of the task force is to detect, analyze and catalog UAPs that could pose a threat to U.S. national security. Sometimes, there are phenomena for which we do not have sufficient data. We want to set an environment where our force feels comfortable reporting all observations so we can collect data, make informed determinations, and address our findings.
Now, after reading this card, which appears to have been created in response to former DNI chief Radcliff’s comments on Fox News and the 60 Minutes report that featured Luis Elizondo, Cmdr. David Fravor, Lt. Cmdr. Alex Dietrich and Christopher Mellon, could you fill an 8 minute segment on a news program or even a 20 minute press conference event with this information at your disposal? Most certainly so, even with minimal public speaking training.
The card is well written and structured. Now imagine how may other cards like this are sent to government officials everyday as events warrant on a wide range of news, policy and military topics.
On the topic of UAP the government keeps its messaging very structured. It has to. No other topic can veer out of control like UAP/UFO can. Note, this doesn’t mean we are saying the narratives being constructed are appropriate. This is not an editorial. But when one reads an example like this in the context of the government now willing to openly deal with and discuss the UAP reality; a reality that is coming slightly more into focus each month, it isn’t hard to understand why the messages they convey to the public need to be kept in certain narrative lanes. If not, we could have information-chaos within the official channels of the public sphere and return to speculations running wild on the UFO topic.
MetronDeep 