Air University Review, March-April 1983
Lieutenant Colonel William J. Wallisch, Jr.
Technological strides made over the past two decades in telecommunications have been astonishing. This revolution has given us communication satellites, lightning transmissions over hair-thin fiber optic systems, digital transmission, and large-scale integrated circuitry that produce literal miracles at both ends of the "message." The military implications of these many developments continue to be a topic of ongoing interest, not to mention in-place or projected hardware. Volumes and volumes of high-technology reporting and curricula race to keep up with the latest laboratory findings. Better and better command and control is the name of the game.
But as a human communications specialist— though, to be sure, one decked out in Air Force blue—I am concerned with the new technology in other than purely military terms. I am worried about propaganda implications. I am worried not about controlled missiles or killer beams from above but rather by messages aimed at friendly territory as carried by the new communications technology. And, in my opinion, direct satellite broadcasting (DBS) is just the weapon to deliver what might be the most potent barrage of "missiles" the free world has ever known.
DBS itself is a simple enough technique. The engineers tell me that because higher satellite power increases everyday, it is soon going to be very easy to broadcast television signals from anywhere on earth directly to home rooftop antennas. You do not need cables or traditional over-the-air transmission towers. Just pump it down from above, and, presto, it’s ‘The Uncle Ivan Show," direct from downtown Moscow. The engineering is most feasible and discussed in such sources as a recent Rand report by Walter S. Baer.1
I will leave the discussion of gigahertz and antenna size and costs to the engineers because I want to devote my discussion to the content of the transmissions. However, those costs and sizes get smaller and smaller every year with Baer saying that "12 color television channels transmitted at 12 gigahertz could be installed for about $250 if mass produced in the millions."
The opportunity to receive worldwide TV transmission is probably something that would catch on like video games and CB radios. People in this country alone are especially hungry for entertainment. They cannot get enough HBO, cable, movies, and overall TV glitter. Just think what American audiences would do if they had the chance to tune in to uncensored TV fare from Italy, Spain, Brazil, Australia, or Russia. And in this society that guarantees freedom of information, who says it is capable of being stopped? And if you did legislate against it, ask the networks how they are coming with the job of shutting down all of those "illegal" home tape units these days that are snatching up their copyright-protected content. The audience potential is there, just waiting for DBS.
That being the case, I do not think it will be long before we see the Soviets make their debut over the international airwaves via high-power satellite systems. They have long recognized the effectiveness of propaganda, and this opportunity is just too good to pass up. Just think back at how many of us sat listening to the clear, loud voice of Radio Moscow telling of America’s sins back in the fifties. For that matter, it is still going strong, even though many of us old shortwave listeners grew out of that old Boy’s Life shortwave contest and went on to other hobbies. The audience is still there, and the funny thing is that we will probably be among the first to put up an antenna.
The Soviets continue to spew out propaganda. A DBS system wouldn’t really be a new venture for them but rather an improvement on the existing one. Recently a story appeared in the Washington Post that cited a Heritage Foundation study on Soviet international broadcasting operations.2 That report estimates that the U.S.S.R. spends $700 million a year on Radio Moscow alone, an operation, incidentally, that puts out some 2000 hours a week, in 82 languages, over 285 high-powered transmitters. And that is just the official broadcasts they claim as their own. With a track record like that, how can they pass up the potential of DBS?
At the Air Force Academy, we teach a course officially known as English 330 Honors, but everyone there knows it as the "Blue Tube," our twice-weekly colorcast over the Academy’s c1osed-circuit system. Besides making the seven-minute news and features program everyone sees, the cadets who take the course learn a great deal about the persuasive power the medium of television has. When they have the course, they have a new respect for TV. As future Air Force leaders they will need that kind of an understanding of TV in order to deal with it fairly but also in terms of what something like DBS promises.
We should be suspicious of a medium that has so captured the attention of world audiences. Americans have become so addicted to television that a new term, "vidiots," has been coined for the mass U.S. audience that will sit in front of 146 million television sets and watch those screens on an average of 45 hours a week. That is a lot of sets and a lot of time devoted to watching them.
I realize full well that color programming from Moscow is not an Air Force problem. But, nonetheless, it will be a national problem that may have serious implications for the Air Force in terms of the beliefs and attitudes of the citizenry it is pledged to defend. The television audience has been subjected to shattering visual stimuli. Wars, assassinations, and a host of terrible images—both real and make believe— have shocked and numbed the American psyche. I cannot help thinking that a lot of this content has had a less than healthy effect. TV eats at us. It almost demands human sacrifice, even including the fall of presidents. I do not think any other media have been quite this ravenous.
The printed word has caused kings and popes alike to react with outrage; heads have rolled because the printed medium dared make its point. That print has had a dramatic impact on humankind is an understatement. Movies, too, have changed opinions and created perceptions about our very way of life. Radio has had considerable influence. Each medium has made its mark and taken its toll in terms of influence and perception. Now we face propaganda beamed at an audience that cannot always tell the good guys from the bad.
The problem with advanced communications technology is that too often the hardware has gotten the lion’s share of the attention, with too little thought given to what message will be transmitted over it. In this case, our national psyche stands a good chance of falling prey to what I predict to be some pretty slick Soviet TV fare over a very accessible DBS system. While we work at the job of building a stronger defensive arm, our population and that of our allies could be bombarded with a barrage of confusing and confounding symbols from an enemy that has already demonstrated a willingness to use any means whatsoever to achieve its objectives.
For ages the poets have told us that the pen is mightier than the sword. It could well be that the new communications wonders will deliver a war of words, not of missiles or killer beams. And in the end, I think we have always recognized the fact that we are engaged in a true struggle for the minds of men, a struggle of ideologies. DBS in theory suggests a communication system that will tie the world together creating the "Global Village" Marshall McLuhan once talked about. But who can guarantee that the village will not be manipulated by the electronic wonders that have the potential to bring humankind closer together?
My students at the Air Force Academy have evidenced an increasing discomfort with TV lately. We are still reading the flowing editorials about media technology and the future. And we are just as excited as those authors are about the potential that fiber optic technology, satellites, cable TV, HBO, video discs, teletext, computers, teleconferences, and digital technology hold for civilization. But we are also becoming increasingly skeptical. We know that the new technology is going to arrive soon. We cannot wait until there is a QUBE-like system here in our town. But we are going to be watchful, especially when the DBS receiving antennas start going up on U.S. rooftops.
We better think about the possibility of strong propaganda coming our way via DBS and devise a counterstrategy nationally. And we had better think about what our own DBS image should be. Or we may find ourselves engaged in a ratings war where the low network loses more than sponsor time. DBS is coming. You haven’t seen anything yet!
USAF Academy, Colorado
Notes
1. Walter S. Baer, Telecommunications Technology in the l980s (Santa Monica, California: Rand Report, P-6275, December 1978).
2. Washington Post, November 22, 1981.
Contributor
Lieutenant Colonel William J. Wallisch, Jr. (B.A., Allegheny College; M.A., Oklahoma University; Ed.D., University of Southern California), is Tenure Associate Professor of English, Director of Media Instruction, and assistant to the Dean of Faculty at the USAF Academy. He is serving as an American Education Fellow for 1982-83 at the University of Pittsburgh. Other Air Force assignments have included radar officer, public affairs, and squadron commander. Colonel Wallisch has published in academic and trade journals.
Disclaimer
The conclusions and opinions expressed in this document are those of the author cultivated in the freedom of expression, academic environment of Air University. They do not reflect the official position of the U.S. Government, Department of Defense, the United States Air Force or the Air University.
Air & Space Power Home Page | Feedback? Email the Editor