Image Source: Dool News
BY EMOKE BEBIAK
You're watching multisource world video news analysis from Newsy.
Kabul wasn’t the only battlefield in the 20-hour fight between NATO’s International Security Assistance Force and the Taliban on Wednesday. Not long before the fight ended on the ground, ISAF’s PR team and the terrorist group took the dispute to Twitter.
CNN has the initial exchange between ISAF and a Taliban spokesman.
“Quote, ‘The outcome is inevitable. Question is how long will terrorists put innocent Afghans in harm’s way?’ Taliban spokesman Abdulqahar Balkhi fired back in text-speak: ‘I don’t know. You’ve been putting them in ‘harm’s way’ for the past 10 years. Razed whole villages and markets. And still have the nerve to talk about ‘harm’s way’”
The exchange then went on to ISAF quoting data on casualties from UN organizations and posting a video of an ISAF commander shaking hands with troops after the Kabul attack.
The Taliban spokesman, in return, questioned the data and tweeted “lol” to a CNN article.
Gizmodo sums up the tweet-down...
“Like two pissed off teens (fighting for the future of an entire society), the NATO and Taliban official Twitter accounts began sparring yesterday, quarreling over civilian casualties.”
The article also announces the winner of the exchange...
“While I'm impressed by the Taliban rep's use of English idioms, NATO's mastery over the [I]nternet slap fight was clear: figures cited, videos pasted—it was a decisive bit of online warfare.”
For some, the virtual back and forth brought attention to past criticisms of NATO’s weakness when it comes to online communication. The Telegraph points out...
“A team of Taliban spokesmen run a sophisticated propaganda outfit which is in daily contact with Afghan reporters using email, twitter, mobile phones and their website... By contrast the Nato press office often appears flat-footed and slow.”
Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty explains the Taliban has been successfully directing media attention, which helped the organization build a narrative--that went unquestioned till now. The article applauds NATO’s quick-witted responses saying,
“Up to now, the ISAF Twitter feed has been mostly used to spread news on the training of Afghan police or to issue statements condemning particular events.”
But a writer for DoD Buzz doubts the Twitter fight will have any effect on either side.
“[F]or as novel as this exchange was, it may not have done much actual good: It’s hard to imagine a group of bearded fighters huddled in some mountain village, following this exchange on their cell phones, then throwing down their rifles and saying, ‘ISAF is right!’”
Transcript by Newsy.
