[House Hearing, 115 Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.A.S.C. No. 115-21]
SOCIAL MEDIA POLICIES OF THE MILITARY SERVICES
__________
HEARING
BEFORE THE
SUBCOMMITTEE ON MILITARY PERSONNEL
OF THE
COMMITTEE ON ARMED SERVICES
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
ONE HUNDRED FIFTEENTH CONGRESS
FIRST SESSION
__________
HEARING HELD
MARCH 21, 2017
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
______
U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE
25-087 WASHINGTON : 2018
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Publishing
Office Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512-1800;
DC area (202) 512-1800 Fax: (202) 512-2104 Mail: Stop IDCC,
Washington, DC 20402-0001
SUBCOMMITTEE ON MILITARY PERSONNEL
MIKE COFFMAN, Colorado, Chairman
WALTER B. JONES, North Carolina JACKIE SPEIER, California
BRAD R. WENSTRUP, Ohio, Vice Chair ROBERT A. BRADY, Pennsylvania
STEVE RUSSELL, Oklahoma NIKI TSONGAS, Massachusetts
DON BACON, Nebraska RUBEN GALLEGO, Arizona
MARTHA McSALLY, Arizona CAROL SHEA-PORTER, New Hampshire
RALPH LEE ABRAHAM, Louisiana JACKY ROSEN, Nevada
TRENT KELLY, Mississippi
Dan Sennott, Professional Staff Member
Craig Greene, Professional Staff Member
Danielle Steitz, Clerk
C O N T E N T S
----------
Page
STATEMENTS PRESENTED BY MEMBERS OF CONGRESS
Coffman, Hon. Mike, a Representative from Colorado, Chairman,
Subcommittee on Military Personnel............................. 1
Speier, Hon. Jackie, a Representative from California, Ranking
Member, Subcommittee on Military Personnel..................... 2
WITNESSES
Brilakis, LtGen Mark A., USMC, Deputy Commandant, Manpower and
Reserve Affairs, United States Marine Corps.................... 5
Burke, VADM Robert P., USN, Chief of Naval Personnel, United
States Navy.................................................... 7
Evans, MG Jason T., USA, Director, Military Personnel Management,
United States Army............................................. 8
Grosso, Lt Gen Gina M., USAF, Deputy Chief of Staff for Manpower,
Personnel and Services, United States Air Force................ 5
Kurta, Anthony M., Performing the Duties of Under Secretary of
Defense for Personnel and Readiness, Office of the Secretary of
Defense........................................................ 4
APPENDIX
Prepared Statements:
Brilakis, LtGen Mark A....................................... 37
Burke, VADM Robert P......................................... 55
Coffman, Hon. Mike........................................... 31
Evans, MG Jason T............................................ 60
Grosso, Lt Gen Gina M........................................ 45
Kurta, Anthony M............................................. 32
Documents Submitted for the Record:
[There were no Documents submitted.]
Witness Responses to Questions Asked During the Hearing:
Ms. Speier................................................... 73
Questions Submitted by Members Post Hearing:
Mr. Bacon.................................................... 80
Ms. Speier................................................... 77
SOCIAL MEDIA POLICIES OF THE MILITARY SERVICES
----------
House of Representatives,
Committee on Armed Services,
Subcommittee on Military Personnel,
Washington, DC, Tuesday, March 21, 2017.
The subcommittee met, pursuant to call, at 3:32 p.m., in
room 2118, Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Mike Coffman
(chairman of the subcommittee) presiding.
OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. MIKE COFFMAN, A REPRESENTATIVE FROM
COLORADO, CHAIRMAN, SUBCOMMITTEE ON MILITARY PERSONNEL
Mr. Coffman. This hearing is now called to order.
I want to welcome everyone here to this afternoon's
Military Personnel Subcommittee hearing. The purpose of today's
hearing is to receive an overview of the military services'
existing social media policies and to learn what changes are
being considered to strengthen, disseminate, and enforce these
policies in light of recent reports of extremely disturbing
online behavior.
The rapid emergence of social media as one of the dominant
means of communication over the past few years has resulted in
many positive and negative consequences. While social media has
proven to be an effective and efficient means of instantly
disseminating important information and views to millions of
people, it can also serve as an all-too-effective platform for
bullying and harassment.
Although social media has the power to connect service
members and veterans seeking support, these same tools can be
used to demean and psychologically harm fellow service members.
While these issues are not limited to the military--and, in
fact, are rampant throughout civilian society--social media
harassment and military--in a military setting can be
particularly damaging because of its effect on service member
morale and good order and discipline. In short, these actions
can erode our military readiness.
In recognition of these challenges, I am aware that each of
the military services has a social media policy designed to
govern service members' conduct when using social media.
However, it is clear from recent cases that these policies have
not been effective and must be strengthened in order to prevent
the abhorrent behavior recently reported in conjunction with
the United States--with the Marines United case.
I look forward to hearing from our witnesses today about
the military services' current social media policies and how
these policies are communicated and trained to the force. I am
also interested to hear what improvements each of the services
are considering in light of the recent cases, and how the
services will ensure that every service member receives
effective training on appropriate online behavior and bystander
intervention.
Finally, I would like to know what resources are available
for victims of online harassment, including legal and
behavioral health assistance.
Before I introduce our panel, let me offer the ranking
member, Ms. Speier, an opportunity to make her opening remarks.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Coffman can be found in the
Appendix on page 31.]
STATEMENT OF HON. JACKIE SPEIER, A REPRESENTATIVE FROM
CALIFORNIA, RANKING MEMBER, SUBCOMMITTEE ON MILITARY PERSONNEL
Ms. Speier. Mr. Chairman, thank you. I have to say, I am
disappointed in the topic of this hearing. Framing the issue as
military social media policies, frankly, misses the point. No
one has ever gone on Facebook, looked at nonconsensually posted
intimate photos, typed a rape threat, and then stopped and
said, Oh, I better not make rape threats, that is against the
military's social media policy.
All of these services have had social media policies that
state it is against good order and discipline to make
disrespectful and derogatory posts. But here we are, exactly
where we were 4 years ago, when I stood on the House floor and
condemned the online bullying of U.S. Marine Corps service
women on a public Facebook page.
At the time, General Amos, who was then the Commandant of
the Marines, responded by stating, quote, ``We share your
indignation,'' unquote, then proceeded in his letter to address
the online abuse of female marines as an IT [information
technology] issue.
Colleagues, it is time to get serious about this. General
Neller told us just last week, that, quote, ``This is not a
social media problem, but we have a cultural problem,''
unquote. So it is appalling that the committee is treating it
as such in this hearing.
Now, it is appalling that we are not hearing from any
service members or veterans who have been victimized by
nonconsensual pornography. If this was just about inappropriate
social media use, well, I don't want to have to be the one to
have to tell Congress or military leadership about this, but it
is not hard to find pornography on the internet.
There is no inherent need to seek out photos of one's
colleagues to make puerile Facebook posts whether or not they
are against official social media policy. No, this is about
service members deliberately trying to degrade, humiliate, and
threaten fellow service members. They encourage stalking,
distributed stolen intimate photos, and have reduced their
comrades to a collection of body parts.
This cultural rot, which is clearly regressed even before,
since 2013, harms our troops and our readiness. It is
abundantly clear that this is not a few bad actors but rather,
a cancer that has continued to spread and thrive in both the
enlisted ranks and the officer corps.
The collateral damage has been the countless women and men
who have answered the call to serve their country and have been
betrayed.
I have requested a hearing with the service chiefs to
discuss these issues, but here we are talking about IT again
without a single survivor of nonconsensual pornography giving
testimony.
So, today, let's have a discussion about the culture of the
military and how to enforce these policies and address
inappropriate and illegal behavior on social media.
The services bring in almost 200,000 new enlistees every
year that come from a wide variety of backgrounds.
Increasingly, those recruits are female. For example, more than
25 percent of new Navy recruits are women. Female service
members are not going away. They are here to stay. They have
every right to serve their country. They have every right to
have the opportunity to have an experience in the military that
gives them benefits and the opportunity to extend their
education.
As General Neller said last week, the reality is that we
can't go to war without women anymore. So we need to deal with
this. What I would like to learn from each of our witnesses
today is how do you embed your policies into everyday training
and military life.
If it is not engrained into daily life and operations of
the military, then I believe it is not taken seriously. And how
do you assess and adopt those policies when it is clear they
are not working?
More importantly, how do you reinforce that the type of
behavior we have seen recently is not okay? Do you need to re-
evaluate how you are educating the force and what can Congress
do to help? We don't need to talk about social media policies.
We need to talk about how to end this hatred and misogyny.
Thank you, and I look forward to your testimony.
Mr. Coffman. Thank you, Ms. Speier.
I ask unanimous consent that non-subcommittee members be
allowed to participate in today's hearing after all
subcommittee members have had an opportunity to ask questions.
Is there an objection? Seeing none, so ordered.
Without objection, non-subcommittee members will be
recognized at the appropriate time for 5 minutes.
We are joined today by an outstanding panel. We will give
each witness the opportunity to present his or her testimony
and each member an opportunity to question the witnesses for 5
minutes. We would also respectfully remind the witnesses to
summarize to the greatest extent possible the high points of
your written testimony in 5 minutes or less. Your written
comments and statements will be made part of the hearing
record.
Let me welcome our panel. Mr. Anthony Kurta, performing the
duties of Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and
Readiness; Lieutenant General Mark Brilakis, Deputy Commandant,
Manpower and Reserve Affairs; Lieutenant General Gina Grosso,
Deputy Chief of Staff for Manpower, Personnel, and Services,
United States Air Force; Vice Admiral William Burke, Chief of
the Naval Personnel; and Major General Jason Evans, Director of
Military Personnel Management, United States Army.
Okay. With that, Mr. Kurta, you may make your opening
statement.
STATEMENT OF ANTHONY M. KURTA, PERFORMING THE DUTIES OF UNDER
SECRETARY OF DEFENSE FOR PERSONNEL AND READINESS, OFFICE OF THE
SECRETARY OF DEFENSE
Mr. Kurta. Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member Speier,
distinguished members of the subcommittee, thank you for
inviting us to testify today regarding DOD [Department of
Defense] policies addressing sexual harassment, hazing, and
bullying by service members through the use of electronic
communications to include online social media sites.
The Department is committing to providing and promoting an
environment where all service members are treated with dignity
and respect.
We are focused on eradicating behaviors that undermine
military readiness, including unlawful discrimination and
harassment. Such misconduct is fundamentally at odds with our
core values and the expectations of the American people. These
behaviors jeopardize our military mission, weaken trust within
our ranks, and erode unit cohesion.
The U.S. military is an institution held in high regard by
the American people, mostly because we embody high standards
and values. However, we are not a perfect institution.
Overwhelmingly, the vast majority of our brave men and
women serving in uniform do so honorably and bravely. When
these men and women volunteer to serve in our military, they do
so knowing the risks involved. However, bullying and sexual
harassment, cyber or otherwise, by fellow service members
should never be one of those risks.
We do our best to uphold our standards and values across
the world every minute of every day. On occasion, service
members fail to meet these standards. When that happens, we
endeavor to the best of our ability to hold each and every one
accountable for their actions.
I can tell you that the Secretary of Defense is investing a
significant amount of his personal time to this issue,
providing his vision and direction directly to the service
secretaries and the Department's most senior uniformed leaders
and listening to those most involved in setting and upholding
our standards and our values.
The Secretary believes that our most successful and ready
warfighting units are those with the best discipline. On the
battlefield, you must have full trust and confidence in your
teammates. That is not possible when you do not treat them with
dignity and respect.
We have structures in place to address this issue with a
combination of leadership, because we treat this as a
leadership issue, education, and training, needed updates to
our policies, and the flexibilities that the UCMJ [Uniform Code
of Military Justice] affords us. As we continue to address
social media activities and review our policies, we will, of
course, work with the Congress on any issues or challenges that
we identify.
Mr. Chairman, members of this subcommittee, thank you for
the opportunity to speak with you today. It is an honor to
serve our military members, and I look forward to your
questions.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Kurta can be found in the
Appendix on page 32.]
Mr. Coffman. Thank you, Mr. Kurta.
Lieutenant General Brilakis, you are now recognized for 5
minutes.
STATEMENT OF LTGEN MARK A. BRILAKIS, USMC, DEPUTY COMMANDANT,
MANPOWER AND RESERVE AFFAIRS, UNITED STATES MARINE CORPS
General Brilakis. Chairman Coffman, Ranking Member Speier,
and distinguished members of the subcommittee, I appreciate the
opportunity to appear before this subcommittee today to provide
an overview of Marine Corps social media policies. As our
Commandant testified to last week, we were all disturbed and
hugely disappointed by recent online conduct by some of our
marines toward their fellow marines. We take this online
behavior as an attack on our Marine Corps ethos.
You have my word that we will hold accountable any behavior
that has a corrosive effect on the good order and discipline
within our corps. We are all committed to using all of the
means within our authority to address this unacceptable
conduct.
Our first priority is to take care of those harms by this
recent online conduct. We continue to encourage individuals to
come forward, and we stand ready to provide immediate support,
information, and referral services to those needing assistance.
Every marine who takes the oath to support and defend our
Constitution, who puts on the uniform, and who puts their life
on the line to defend our way of life here and at home is
provided and has earned the trust and respect of the American
people. So too should they be given that same trust and respect
by those of us in uniform.
Any breach of that trust and respect within the ranks
cannot be tolerated and must be dealt with with affirmative
steps to support those individuals harmed by these actions with
clarity to ensure that all marines act with honor and with
accountability for those who fail to live up to our standards
of conduct. We will be immediate, decisive, unceasing in fixing
this problem and defeating this attack on our core values.
Thank you for the opportunity to present at today's
hearing.
[The prepared statement of General Brilakis can be found in
the Appendix on page 37.]
Mr. Coffman. Thank you for your testimony.
Lieutenant General Grosso, you are now recognized for 5
minutes.
STATEMENT OF LT GEN GINA M. GROSSO, USAF, DEPUTY CHIEF OF STAFF
FOR MANPOWER, PERSONNEL AND SERVICES, UNITED STATES AIR FORCE
General Grosso. Chairman Coffman, Ranking Member Speier,
and distinguished members of this subcommittee, thank you for
the opportunity to discuss recent events effecting our airmen
and their families.
Let me be clear: cyber bullying, hazing, and sharing
private images of our airmen is inconsistent with the Air
Force's core values and our culture of dignity and respect.
While the tools of modern warfare may change, the
importance of trust never will. Trust is essential to victory
on the battlefield, and when we violate trust on social media,
we break down the fabric of what it means to be an airman. It
also degrades the trust between the Air Force and the American
people we serve.
For a number of years, the Air Force has worked to improve
how we build culture and instill an understanding of expected
behaviors in our airmen. We started in 2012 by publishing Air
Force Instruction 1-1, Air Force Standards. It was further
updated in 2014 to clarify, among other things, the social
media section of the instruction. We went one step further in
2015 and in a time of diminishing resources when we stood up
the Profession of Arms Center of Excellence, affectionately
known as PACE. PACE is dedicated to providing tools and
training materials designed to help commanders, supervisors,
and airmen understand and embrace our core values, our
standards, and our expectations for all airmen.
In the specific area of social media, we have training
modules in the curriculum of all of our accession sources,
officer and enlisted, to include scenario-based training and
basic military training that covers social media use. We also
cover social media use in all our professional military
education courses from Airman Leadership School through Air War
College. We have incorporated social media policies into a
variety of generic and functionally specific Air Force
instructions that discuss professional and unprofessional
relationships as well as the proper use of social media in Air
Force communications.
In parallel, our performance evaluations system includes a
requirement to evaluate and comment on an airman's adherence to
treating other airmen with dignity and respect as well as an
airman's responsibility to positively contribute to a healthy
organizational climate.
While these various efforts have been ongoing, developing
and improving our Air Force culture is a continuous journey
whereby we monitor, adjust, and evolve. Unfortunately, these
recent social media events provide us another lens to view
areas where we can improve and better scaffold our training,
education, and policy efforts.
From an accountability perspective, we condemn these
inappropriate acts. The Air Force Office of Special
Investigations is investigating allegations regarding
information and inappropriate photographs of airmen posted on
websites without their prior consent. Airmen whose images were
posted without consent have a number of resources available to
them.
Regardless if it is an airman who is deployed or at home
station, they can seek help from their unit commanders, first
sergeants, and supervisors. They are also encouraged to seek
help directly from a variety of resources to include chaplains,
military family life consultants, mental health professionals,
airman and family readiness centers, master resiliency
trainers, the Inspector General security forces, the local
judge advocate, equal opportunity, our Office of Special
Investigations, our victim advocates, special victims counsel,
and sexual assault response coordinators, all who provide care
and serve a bridge to other specialties. There are also online
resources available through Military OneSource and the
Department of Defense.
We are currently assessing all legal and administrative
tools at our disposal to attack this problem and are
considering additional authorities we need as a service. Once
our review is complete, we will not hesitate to ask for your
assistance in providing additional tools as necessary.
If the past two decades have taught us anything, it is that
the demand for airspace and cyber power is growing. In the
words of our chief of staff, ``From our newest airman basic to
the chief of staff, we are all accountable for meeting ethical
and performance standards in our actions.''
We should live our core values every day on and off duty.
We must continuously conduct ourselves in a manner that brings
credit to our Nation and each other. Service in our Air Force
is a higher calling, and we carry this legacy forward for
future generations of airmen.
Thank you for your time today, and I look forward to your
questions.
[The prepared statement of General Grosso can be found in
the Appendix on page 45.]
Mr. Coffman. Lieutenant General Grosso, thank you so much
for your testimony.
Vice Admiral Burke, you are now recognized for 5 minutes.
STATEMENT OF VADM ROBERT P. BURKE, USN, CHIEF OF NAVAL
PERSONNEL, UNITED STATES NAVY
Admiral Burke. Thank you Chairman Coffman, Ranking Member
Speier, and distinguished members of this committee for this
opportunity to discuss recent events.
The military has felt the sting of disappointment from
multiple reports of unprofessional and totally inappropriate
behavior by some of our service members.
Despite repeated efforts to end harassment and cyber
bullying in our ranks, this intolerable behavior still exists.
There is no room in our Navy for this toxic behavior, and we
are aggressively going after it. It makes us weaker. It erodes
trust within our team, and it cedes advantage to the enemy. We
are committed to eradicating this behavior and this mindset
from our force. The United States Navy is a professional force,
and the American people expect us to maintain high standards.
This type of behavior is not who we are. We expect better of
ourselves.
The bad actors we have discovered have found a new home,
underground. We will not tolerate their cowardice and the dark
shadows of the internet. We will be relentless in exposing
these perceived sanctuaries and reinforcing our expectation of
sailors' conduct whether in uniform, at home, or online.
To get after this, the Navy immediately stood up a senior
leader working group to attack this from the top down. This is
not a one-and-done review, but rather, a comprehensive strategy
and plan that underpins our efforts. In addition to helping any
sailor who may be impacted by this sort of behavior, we are
going after this in several ways, but the main points are,
first, to go after character.
This is not how we treat our team members. This is an issue
of both leadership and courage. Our Chief of Naval Operations,
Admiral John Richardson, directed force-wide discussions on
expectations for online conduct emphasizing that there are no
bystanders, even in cyberspace. As sailors, our conduct at
work, at home, or online must exemplify the Navy's core values
of honor, courage, and commitment at all times. And when we see
something wrong, no team member should look the other way.
These discussions are being led by our small team leaders, who
are best positioned to influence both the workplace environment
and off-duty conduct.
We are emphasizing this element of character and the idea
of no bystander into the Navy's leader development framework
and into our broader sexual harassment and sexual assault
campaign plan.
Next, the online content. The Navy Criminal Investigative
Service continues to investigate misbehavior online and is
working with social media companies to curb this activity.
And then, accountability. We are reviewing the Uniform Code
of Military Justice and Navy policy governing mandatory
administrative separation to ensure that they are adequate.
Sailors who are involved in inappropriate online behavior
and lose the trust and confidence of the commanding officers
will be held accountable by a full range of criminal and
administrative actions.
We have provided commanding officers and their teams the
toolkit for this issue, which includes the UCMJ guidance, an
updated online conduct guide, and a social media handbook. And
we are encouraging anyone with direct knowledge of explicit
photos taken without consent or knowledge to contact the Naval
Criminal Investigative Service via multiple avenues.
In closing, we cannot allow ourselves to be tainted by
those who do not share our values. And while we have made
progress, there is still much work to be done.
Navy leaders, from the flag level down to the deck plates,
own this problem. As a team, we will solve it.
Thank you, and I look forward to your questions.
[The prepared statement of Admiral Burke can be found in
the Appendix on page 55.]
Mr. Coffman. Thank you, Vice Admiral Burke.
Major General Evans, you are now recognized for 5 minutes.
STATEMENT OF MG JASON T. EVANS, USA, DIRECTOR, MILITARY
PERSONNEL MANAGEMENT, UNITED STATES ARMY
General Evans. Chairman Coffman, Ranking Member Speier,
distinguished members of the committee, thank you for the
opportunity to appear before you on behalf of America's Army.
The Army is a value-based organization comprised of a team
of professionals--soldiers and Army civilians. Harassment,
bullying, hazing, stalking, discrimination, retaliation, and
any type of misconduct that undermines the dignity and respect
will not be tolerated, and those found in violation will be
held accountable.
The Army has worked diligently to develop a holistic
continuum for professional conduct in all aspects of soldiers'
and Army civilians' lives. The Army has implemented our online
conduct policies throughout every level of training and
military education so that every soldier understands how to
treat others with dignity and respect.
Army policy states that hazing, bullying, and other
behaviors that undermine dignity and respect are punitive in
nature. These actions are fundamentally in opposition to the
Army values and are prohibited behaviors. Our Army-wide
guidance published in 2015 also makes clear that this
prohibition applies at all times and extends to all forms of
virtual and electronic media. Commanders and supervisors at all
levels are responsible for enforcing this prohibition. They are
required to conduct annual hazing and bullying training
including online conduct, publish and post written command
policy statements on the treatment of persons, and take
appropriate actions in response to alleged violations.
In 2015, then-Chief of Staff of the Army General Odierno
established a special initiatives team to address online
harassment via social media. And to address the dilemma of
prevention and response to unprofessional behavior online, the
special initiatives team coordinated across the Army outlined
three lines of efforts to achieve the goal of curbing
unprofessional online behavior by soldiers.
First, by updating existing policies and regulations,
updating training materials and infusing training base with the
information and best practices, and sharing information
regarding responsible online conduct.
The Army developed online conduct discussion points and
vignettes in October of 2015. These discussion points and
vignettes have been incorporated into institutional, command,
and unit training packages for equal opportunity, equal
employment opportunity, treatment of persons, sexual
harassment/assault response and prevention, and cyber
awareness, among others.
In addition to updated policy, Army Public Affairs
developed a strategic messaging campaign to raise awareness of
online conduct and the consequences of misconduct and published
a social media handbook that includes an expanded discussion of
online responsibilities and best practices section on
protecting oneself from and reporting online misconduct.
The Army developed methods to track and report online
misconduct through sexual harassment assault response
prevention reporting and law enforcement agencies.
Finally, Not in My Squad program, developed by the Center
for the Army Profession and Ethics, was designed to help
soldiers assess the state of mutual trust and cohesion within
their squads. The grassroots nature of the interactive program
helps junior leaders to gain situational understanding and
inspire ethical and professional behavior. The Not in My Squad
campaign facilitates leader involvement and accountability and
aids in the creation of a professional and ethical culture
among members of the Army team.
As our chief of staff, General Milley, recently remarked on
this topic, we expect leaders and influencers, from squad level
up, to talk about and demonstrate what respect looks like at
work, at home, and online.
In closing, the Army recognizes the potential dangers
concerning social media and is proactively working to ensure
our soldiers are aware of the standards of conduct and
policies, training, and programs.
We will continue to enforce standards and imbue soldiers
and Army civilians with Army values and emphasize professional
behavior in all that we do.
Again, thank you for the opportunity, and I look forward to
your questions.
[The prepared statement of General Evans can be found in
the Appendix on page 60.]
Mr. Coffman. Major General Evans, thank you so much for
your testimony.
Mr. Kurta, each of the services has a social media policy,
but they differ in substance and form. In addition, the
proponent for the social media policy differs from service to
service. Is there a benefit to standardizing across the
services these policies as well as the proponent for the
policies?
Mr. Kurta. Sir, thank you for the question, and I would say
very briefly, no. I don't believe there is.
And I say that, because the Secretary has been very clear
that the cultures of the individual services are great
warfighting readiness advantages. And when we make policy, it
has to be broad enough that the services within their cultures
can do what is right. And so what is right and best for, you
know, an Army soldier in a brigade combat team in Italy is not
the same for that sailor that is out on the aircraft carrier,
you know, somewhere in the Middle East.
So our policies have to be--give the intent of the
Secretary to the service secretaries and the service chiefs and
be broad enough, directive enough so that they know the intent
of what is expected, and then within their cultures devise the
best solution that works best for their service.
Mr. Coffman. I am going to ask all of you the same
question. I will start with Lieutenant General Brilakis, United
States Marine Corps. How are you integrating social media
policies into training on other topics such as sexual assault
prevention or ethics training?
General Brilakis. Sure. Thanks for the question. With
respect to our social media policy, our first policy was
written in 2010. It was the first of its kind. It was
reinforced in a Marine administrative message in 2013, and last
week, we reissued a new policy to cover the issues with social
media to make marines mindful that they have responsibilities
in the social space, to remind marines that they are our best
messenger of the Marine Corps if they operate within the
guidelines of the social media policy, and then to remind them
that missed--not adhering to that policy has consequences
through the various elements of the Uniform Code of Military
Justice.
Lastly, what it does is it talks to marines who may be the
victims of misbehavior on social media, those remedies, those
individuals they can reach out to, that support this throughout
the Marine Corps, whether it is our sexual assault response
coordinators, our unit victims advocates, the victims' legal
counsel, the equal opportunity representatives and units, the
legal counsel of the NCIS [Naval Criminal Investigative
Service], et cetera, all wrapped up into that particular
policy.
What we are running right now, what the Commandant has done
is directed us to form a task force, very high-level task
force, that is chaired by the Assistant Commandant of the
Marine Corps. It has been meeting for the last 2 weeks. I sat
through a 2\1/2\-hour meeting of the executive counsel of this
task force today. There's been a lot of discussion. There is
some progress. There is some tangible actions that are going
on.
You mentioned education and training on the social media
policy, and that is important. It is critical. Part of what is
being looked at at this task force are not only current actions
that can be taken. And you are well aware of Commandant Neller
immediately getting out and publishing a video message to the
entire force, telling them that this behavior is unacceptable,
this behavior is antithetical to the ethos of marines. Those
actions that have updated this policy are all products of that
task force.
The task force is also looking in terms of long-range
future operations, if you will, with respect to the social
media task force. Training and education is fundamental to
that. A review of the programs and instructions and all of our
formal courses will be part of that process to ensure that the
training that we do is consistent, repetitive, and runs through
the marine life service.
Mr. Coffman. Okay. So my time is limited, so I will just
leave it with the Marine Corps right now, since the problem
seems to be centered on the Marine Corps, and that is that
right now, though, is--I realize you are reviewing all of this,
but right now, is there a social media training requirement in
terms of this particular issue at boot camp and then on an
annual training requirement for every marine?
General Brilakis. I will be honest with you, sir, I can't
tell you whether there is a training requirement as it existed
prior to 2 weeks ago.
Mr. Coffman. Okay.
General Brilakis. What I will tell you, what I will say is
the Commandant has already been on a trip down to Camp Lejeune
to pass a message that was put out in his video message and
also in the MARADMIN [Marine administrative message]. He just
signed off on a white letter that has gone out to all
commanders. Every marine, to include myself, will sign a formal
counseling on the tenets of that policy and our expectations
that they adhere to that policy.
Mr. Coffman. Thank you. Ranking Member Speier, you are now
recognized for 5 minutes.
Ms. Speier. Mr. Kurta, I was somewhat astonished by your
comment, frankly. To think that we need separate social media
policies from one service to another makes no sense.
It would seem to me that if you take a picture without the
consent of someone, and then post it on the internet with their
name, rank, and serial number, whether you are a marine, or a
sailor, or any one of the other services, you are violating the
law. So why wouldn't we have a social media policy that was
clear throughout all of the services?
Mr. Kurta. Well, ma'am, I hope I didn't leave the
impression that we think there should be no OSD [Office of the
Secretary of Defense] policy on social media.
Ms. Speier. No. You know what, you don't even need to
answer it. I think that you are wrong. I think that this goes
to just fundamental values. It goes to fundamental culture.
Mr. Kurta. Yes.
Ms. Speier. And I just want to make that statement. I just
don't think it makes sense.
I just want to share with you a couple of, what I received
back in 2013. ``Don't wrap it and tap it, tape her and rape
her.'' This is the Marines, now.
Here is another one: ``Listen up, bitches. I am your worst
nightmare. You piss us off, I won't give an F who you are, and
we will rape your world. And I am not talking about the come-
here-and-smell-this kind of rape.'' I won't read the rest of
this.
Are you getting the message?
``I raped pregnant women once. Best threesome forever.''
I just don't even want to look at any more of these.
It was bad in 2013. It is bad in 2017. Nothing has changed.
Of the 30,000 persons that are on that Marines United website,
730 of them are Active Duty, and 150 of them are Reserves. So
we have a problem here that just talking about the policy is
just not going to cut it.
I guess I want to ask the other services. Let's start with
you, General Grosso. Have you gone now and--since the Marines
United dust-up, have you gone and looked to see if there were
sites with Air Force members represented?
General Grosso. Yes, ma'am. Our Office of Air Force and
Special Investigations----
Ms. Speier. Can you turn it on, please.
General Grosso. Yes, ma'am.
Our Office of Air Force and Special Investigations has
looked, and they have looked at over 30 different sites, and
we, to date, have not found a site specifically dedicated to
denigrating airmen, female airmen.
Ms. Speier. Okay. How about you Admiral Burke?
Admiral Burke. Yes, ma'am. We worked with our Naval
Criminal Investigative Service. There are no similar websites
that are directly affiliated with the Navy that have been
identified to date. There are, literally, millions of websites
affiliated and that are dot-com, for-profit websites that have,
you know, words like ``topless sailor'' and things like that in
their title, with all sorts of postings and things of that
nature on them. Many of them not official photographs. So those
are the sorts of stuff that we are pouring through right now.
Ms. Speier. General Evans.
General Evans. Ma'am, I am aware of an effort, a
multiservice investigation level to look at a site that was
potentially linked to the Marines United site.
Ms. Speier. That was an Army site?
General Evans. No, ma'am, that had multiple service members
on the site. A site called Tumblr, and I am aware of an ongoing
multiservice investigation with that.
Ms. Speier. But the rest of you weren't aware of that?
Okay. See, I hate--I think you should all be aware of it.
You should all be looking at it.
Let me ask you this: UCMJ article 120 only applies to those
who take pictures, intimate pictures, of someone without their
consent. There is nothing that refers to it being distributed
without consent, because many pictures are sometimes taken and
offered for in consent because your intimate partner is
deployed, and you are sending them a picture. You then break
up, and then your former intimate partner posts it.
We have introduced legislation last week that would amend
UCMJ to include the prohibition of nonconsensual sharing of
explicit photographs. I would like to ask each of the services
if you support the legislation?
Mr. Kurta. Ma'am, if I could take that one. We cannot
comment on pending legislation; however, I would say as we all
look at this problem and decide how best to respond to it, both
at a department level and the individual service level, we are
open to all good ideas and partnering with the Congress for
anything that gives us better tools for both awareness and
accountability, but we cannot comment on pending legislation.
Ms. Speier. How about the services? Can they comment
independent of you?
Mr. Kurta. No, ma'am, that is--I am sorry. That is a
department policy.
Ms. Speier. All right. I yield back.
Mr. Coffman. Thank you, Ranking Member Speier.
Mr. Jones, you are now recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. Jones. Mr. Chairman, thank you very much. And I
associate with many of the comments that Ms. Speier has made.
And I have been on this committee for 22 years and served with
you and others for a long period of time, and I can't help but
think the pressure that is on our society because of the new
technology, the threat to our world because of cyberspace
issues that we all deal with, particularly on this committee,
classified briefings and everything.
And here we are dealing with the societal problems of the
internet and how it impacts our young people, many who go into
the military, all branches--thank you all, again, for your
service and being here today.
You know, I represent the Third District of North Carolina,
which is the home of Camp Lejeune Marine Base and Cherry Point
Marine Air Station, and obviously, this has been a huge issue
for our Nation, but also for the district I represent--not just
those in uniform, the Marine Corps primarily, but for the
citizens who really know that this problem is actually an issue
that has grown and festered in our society.
And, you know, when you see children that are 5, 6, and 7
getting iPhones for Christmas, I think you all have an
impossible responsibility to get to the genesis of what has
happened in the different services. Not just one, even though
this is primarily the Marine Corps, but this, I think--I am
afraid I am wrong--I hope I am wrong, but I am afraid I might
be right, this is going to be a battle, if I can put it that
way, for the different services--and, again, we talk primarily
about the Marine Corps today--that we have not seen before. And
it is not going to change. It is going to be with us when I am
dead and gone and many of you young people sitting out there
being old men like I am today.
But I want to ask you, with all you are trying to do--and I
know that General Mattis, now Secretary of Defense, and also
General Neller the Commandant, who I have great respect for,
this is a task that is going to be a difficult one because of
the darkness of the world of the internet, so to speak.
Do you feel at this beginning stage of this investigation
that you have all the resources that you need to try to get to
the genesis of this problem?
Mr. Kurta. Sir, first, thank you for the question. And
while we, you know, acknowledge that this is a problem that is
also in society, we don't hide behind that.
Mr. Jones. I understand.
Mr. Kurta. We hold ourselves to higher values and standards
than is in society. You know, I am also a little bit hopeful,
because the Department has taken on great cultural issues in
the past and been successful, whether it is integration of the
races, whether it is the rampant drug abuse we used to see in
the 1970s and 1980s, whether it is the alcohol problems that we
saw, again, in the 1970s and 1980s, we have taken on some of
those large issues and had cultural issues and had great
success over time when we applied leadership and the element of
time.
Now, some of those things took, you know, many decades to
solve and to change the culture in an organization of 2
million-plus people, it does take time and we realize it is
limited in this case. So I am hopeful. And I think as all of us
here and the rest of the leadership in the Department get
further into this, we will find out further tools that will be
helpful to us. We don't have a list of those today, but we
certainly will be talking further with you and the rest of the
Congress and whoever else we need for access to certain tools.
General Brilakis. Thank you, Tony.
Congressman Jones, thank you. There's a lot of work to do.
This task force that the Commandant has stood up is working
across what is happening today, what we need to do for the
future, current policies, a review of all the policies that
affect this.
Most importantly, dealing with those individuals who have
been harmed by this activity, this abhorrent activity. And so
we are learning as we are going.
The commitment of the Commandant has been clear. It has
been strong. He wants action soon, and we are working to give
him a series of executable recommendations upon which he can
act.
Mr. Jones. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Mr. Coffman. Thank you, Mr. Jones.
Mr. Brady, you are now recognized for 5 minutes, and then
we are going to have to recess for a vote.
Mr. Brady. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I don't really have any
questions. I probably have an observation.
Lieutenant General Brilakis, online humiliation,
denigration, posting of images you have on your statement.
Lieutenant Grosso, vile--I mean, private images you have
sharing posted on your statement, inappropriate behavior,
humility, harassment, and bullying.
Mr. Kurta, you have sexual harassment, hazing, and
bullying, but I don't see any images.
And Vice Admiral Burke, you have inappropriate behavior,
harassment, bullying but no images.
And the same with General Evans, harassment, bullying,
hazing, stalking, retaliation but no images. I really was under
the impression and am really kind of concerned about images,
because that is the new thing now with the internet and people
posting images, and God knows how far it goes or where it goes.
I was wondering why the three of you don't have images?
Mr. Kurta. Well, Congressman Brady, I would just say this:
Whether it is the use of images, whether it is the use of
social online media, those are tools by which people are
denigrating their fellow service members, through hazing,
bullying, sexual harassment. There's a number of different ways
to characterize it.
So we were trying to represent the fundamental behavior,
which is bullying, sexual harassment, hazing, in this case.
There's a variety of tools that people use to perpetrate that
type of behavior, but we have to get to the fundamental
behavior.
Mr. Brady. Well, I just wanted to hear you say images.
Mr. Kurta. Images, yes, sir. Absolutely, that is definitely
one of the tools that is being used. Yes, sir.
Mr. Brady. Vice Admiral Burke.
Admiral Burke. Yes, sir. The images and the social media
and the internet are just the new--the environment we had not
been thinking about as much as we should have been.
Mr. Brady. Major General.
General Evans. Yes, sir. Images in terms of what we defined
in the online additional guidance and online conduct would
include any harm to do to anybody via virtual electronic, which
would include images, sir.
Mr. Brady. Well, I'm glad to hear that, because all of
these other things aren't really, like, online: Any
inappropriate behavior, bullying, you know, harassment, that is
not necessarily online. But the images are what we are talking
about, which are online and which is what everybody, kind of,
like, looks at. Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Coffman. Would the gentleman yield?
Mr. Russell. Thank you.
I would, just for clarification--and I think we are all in
very much agreement on this, not just with the panel but also
here on the committee on these issues.
But I would like to point out that in section 920 of
article 120c, that images and privacy and many of these things
are addressed in the Uniform Code of Military Justice. There is
a little bit of confusion about what is in the code.
Section 2: ``knowingly photographs, videotapes, films, or
records by any means the private area of another person,
without that other person's consent and under circumstances in
which that other person has a reasonable expectation of
privacy''.
And then it defines this, reasonable expectation means
under ``circumstances in which a reasonable person would
believe that he or she could disrobe in privacy, without being
concerned that an image of a private area of a person was being
captured''.
Broadcast means--the term to broadcast means ``to
electronically transmit a visual image with the intent that it
be viewed by a person or persons.''
So the uniform code very much does address these issues.
And what I would like to point out, this is really something
that demands accountability rather than additional policy or
code. I would be interested in your thoughts on that, Mr.
Kurta, and whoever else would like to comment.
Do you see this as an accountability issue, or do you see
that the uniform code doesn't adequately address it when it
appears that in the language it already does? Sir?
Ms. Speier. Would the gentleman yield before asking the
question? The problem is, sometimes pictures are taken with
consent, and then subsequently----
Mr. Russell. And if I may, to the ranking member, it does
address on the privacy: Without being concerned that an image
in terms of that. So it specifically addresses that it was not
with consent. That they are actually assuming that they were in
complete privacy.
And so I point that out, because in section 920, article
120c, the language seems to be pretty well defined to address a
lot of the electronic digital imagery aspects of privacy.
I would be curious to know, is this an accountability
issue, or is this something that the uniform code does not
adequately cover?
Mr. Kurta. Well, sir, thank you for the question. I am just
saying, you know, the back and forth kind of illustrates how
complex this problem is.
Absolutely, it is accountability. We have standards. We
have values, as I mentioned, you know, in my opening statement,
and sometimes we find that people don't live up to those values
and standards. When they don't, we hold them accountable.
Again, as--we can't talk about an ongoing investigation,
but as it proceeds, I think we will have a better idea of our
tools.
We have policies. I think they're, actually, in many
respects very clear on hazing, bullying, sexual harassment, the
use of online media to perpetrate those. So the policy is
there, and we will see what our tools available for
accountability----
Mr. Russell. And if I may point out, sir, it is the uniform
code. This is something that can put people in prison, that can
give them a felony conviction. This is something that would
result in courts-martial, the loss of rank and privileges and
honorable discharge, any number of things. So it is not just
policy, it is the legal standard by which everything good order
and discipline is governed.
And that is why before we got too confused on what is there
and what is not, I wanted to point out my understanding under
the UCMJ is that the language is in there.
Is it your understanding that it is not, because there's
been some of that in the questioning today? My understanding is
that it is there. So now it is a matter of accountability. Is
that true, or not?
General Brilakis. No, sir. This is all about
accountability. This is all about having individuals who have
betrayed the trust of their fellow service members, holding
them accountable.
The Uniform Code of Military Justice has a number of
articles under which, in certain cases, we can bring these
things to a prosecution. You have mentioned 120c; 120c is a
relatively new article, and there is not a lot of experience
behind it.
Right now, the NCIS, this is their number one priority.
They have formed a task force with the other services'
investigative bodies, and they are working cooperatively to
determine the facts and uncover the investigatory material that
we can then turn over to commanders to take out the Uniform
Code of Military Justice----
Ms. Shea-Porter. Mr. Chairman, I am not sure who I ask
this. If I could just interject one second because of what my
colleague just said, which is so relevant?
Mr. Coffman. Why don't we----
Ms. Shea-Porter. I won't be able to return, unfortunately.
It is going to be very quick.
I am actually holding your enlistment document, and it says
right here, subject to separation at the end of my enlistment:
If my behavior fails to meet acceptable military standards I
may be discharged and given a certificate for less than
honorable service.
I don't know why we have to wait. If you tell them at the
very beginning, and they sign off saying that their behavior is
not acceptable, they understand what the parameters of
acceptable is, and I hope they do, I don't understand why we
have to, then, pursue many various avenues.
Do you still have the power to throw them out if it is very
clear that they can't do this when they sign up and they signed
on to this document?
General Brilakis. Yes, ma'am, absolutely, we have the
authority. But everybody--everybody deserves due process, and
the Uniform Code of Military Justice requires due process.
Whether it be through an administrative procedure or military
justice procedure, there are processes.
Ms. Shea-Porter. I understand----
General Brilakis. So the fact----
Ms. Shea-Porter. I am sorry----
Mr. Coffman. We are in recess for a vote.
Ms. Shea-Porter. At the very beginning. They need to know
and they will be thrown out. Thank you. And I yield back. Thank
you, Chairman.
[Recess.]
Mr. Coffman. This hearing is called back to order.
I had started a question about training, and so I started
in with the Marine Corps, and now I want to go to the other
services, and the question is this: How are you integrating
social media policies into training on other topics such as
sexual assault prevention or ethics training? Lieutenant
General Grosso, I wonder if you could answer this question,
please.
General Grosso. Yes, sir. As I indicated, we have training
across our continuum of learning, but as we do, we stood up a
task force as well to do a complete review of our policies and
our training and our accountability, and that is one of the
things that we are taking a hard look at. Is the training
synchronized, is it properly scaffolded, is there other places
we should put it, and some of the other places we are looking
at, we do resiliency training, and we thought maybe putting
some real scenarios in our resiliency training.
We also do new spouse training, and we start talking to our
spouses about it through that program and through our key
spouse program and in some of our predeployment training as
well. We do social media training, but it is really around
OPSEC [operational security], and there is probably other
opportunities as we look at our training, our cradle-to-grave
training where we can put that in.
And we also have a commander's call of the week, and we
have already put that module out for the commander's call of
the week, but there are, I am sure, other places that we will
be able to embed this training in.
Mr. Coffman. Just real quick. In terms of your sexual--in
terms of--let's say you are going to integrate this in with
your sexual assault training, it would probably fit there,
sexual harassment, sexual assault training. Tell me what you do
in--so I assume you have training requirements in your basic
training?
General Grosso. Yes, sir, we do.
Mr. Coffman. And then do you have them on an annual basis
that are in fact required, that are noted in the personnel
file?
General Grosso. They are there. We don't necessarily put
them in the personnel file.
Mr. Coffman. Okay.
General Grosso. But we track them, and there is annual
training requirements for sexual assault and sexual harassment.
Mr. Coffman. Okay. Vice Admiral Burke.
Admiral Burke. Yes, sir, we have a full spectrum of
training that is aimed at sexual harassment and sexual assault
prevention that includes a focus on social media. So at Recruit
Training Command for our enlisted folks, we have a course that
is called ``Life Skills,'' and it is a full-spectrum course
that teaches our sailors how to intervene when they see other
sailors heading down paths of destructive behaviors.
You know, by this point in Recruit Training Command, they
should have had Navy core values instilled in them, so it
focuses on how to help other people that are heading down the
wrong path. But then it focuses on healthy relationships,
stress management, responsible alcohol use, hazing and
fraternization, and then a heavy emphasis on sexual assault
prevention. And this is where we teach folks that it is okay to
stand up and say--in fact, they have a responsibility to stand
up and say: That is wrong. I don't accept that type of
behavior.
And we also emphasize what right looks like. We take that
approach on it. And in that core module, we talk a lot about
social media and acceptable behavior on social media, and we
also cover OPSEC concerns there, but a lot of social media
behavior discussion there.
We have a similar approach at the Naval Academy. There the
course is called, SHAPE, Sexual Harassment and Assault
Prevention Education, similar type of coverage there. And then
when folks get out into the fleet, there is a refresher
recurring training, that has morphed over the years. Last
year's version was called, ``Chart the Course,'' and there were
16 different modules. They were facilitated DVD [digital video
disc] course modules, and one of----
Mr. Coffman. Are there annual training requirements?
Admiral Burke. There are. There is an annual training
requirement that is on the requirements, and then there is an
additional facilitated vignette, and the vignette specifically
was on, you know, a sailor videotaping someone against--without
their knowledge, and then the decision point and----
Mr. Coffman. Sure.
Admiral Burke [continuing]. The discussion point was should
he email it off or not, and it went from there. So there are--
there are those types of requirements throughout our
curriculum, yes, sir.
Mr. Coffman. Thank you. Major Evans, United States Army.
General Evans. Yes, sir. All training plans and programs of
instructions at all level of the Army, to include the initial
military entry of training, to include precommand courses, and
all professional military education, incorporate online conduct
training as part of equal opportunity training, sexual
harassment, assault and response prevention training.
Thereafter, that training is required on an annual basis to
conduct the equal opportunity training, the sexual harassment,
assault and response training, and part of that is online
conduct is a component of both of those annual trainings.
In addition to that, commanders are required to publish
policy letters on both of those and make sure that soldiers
know how they are supposed to conduct themselves and where they
can report this kind of training, and the Army Public Affairs
has published a social media handbook that provides examples of
policy letters for social media conduct.
Mr. Coffman. Thank you. Ms. Speier, you are now recognized
for 5 minutes.
Ms. Speier. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I want to go back to
what our good colleague from Oklahoma talked about before we
recessed, because you have to read this very carefully. He is
wrong, and I want to state it for the record.
First of all, article 120c has been around since 2012. So
you have had 5 years to use it, and my first question is going
to be have any of you used 120--article 120c in actually
enforcing the social media misuse of photographs?
General Grosso. Ranking Member, yes, ma'am, we have used
article 120 in holding airmen accountable for this offense.
Ms. Speier. For these specific--for use of social media
with consent or without consent?
General Grosso. It was revenge porn, and it was charged
along with other things, but it was part of the charge under
120c.
Ms. Speier. So revenge porn is normally where it is--it is
a photograph, an image that is taken of someone with consent
and then subsequently distributed without consent.
General Grosso. I can get you more details.
[The information referred to can be found in the Appendix
on page 73.]
Ms. Speier. Okay. So my only point here is how about any of
you others?
General Brilakis. Ma'am, I will have to take it for the
record. I don't have it----
Ms. Speier. All right. Would you, and then come back to us?
[The information referred to can be found in the Appendix
on page 73.]
Admiral Burke. Ma'am, we had one case of videotaping on a
submarine and six individuals were court-martialed under 120c.
Ms. Speier. Without consent?
Admiral Burke. The video was without consent and it was
distributed locally without consent.
Ms. Speier. That is clearly under 120c. General Evans.
General Evans. Ma'am, I would have to take it for the
record, but the lawyers have advised me under--for social media
misconduct, article 92, 120c for nonconsent, consensual sending
of photos; 133, conduct unbecoming an officer and gentleman;
134, clause 1, conduct prejudicial to good order and
discipline; and clause 2, conduct of a nature to bring
discredit upon the Armed Forces.
[The information referred to can be found in the Appendix
on page 74.]
Ms. Speier. I don't want to beat this horse, but it is very
clear under 120c that it has to be taken without legal
justification or lawful authorization. It is taken without
consent or it is distributed without the other person's consent
and other circumstances in which the other person has a
reasonable expectation of privacy.
So you have to--knowingly broadcasting it or distributing
such a recording of that person knew or reasonably should have
known was made under the circumstances listed in paragraphs 1
or 2, in both cases you have to show that it was originally
without consent, and in many of these cases, with revenge porn,
the first image is taken with consent or it is shared with
consent. It is just the subsequent distribution, so I just
wanted to make that clear, Mr. Chairman.
Let me ask you this: How many of you have Facebook pages?
Mr. Kurta.
Mr. Kurta. Ma'am, I do not.
Ms. Speier. General.
General Brilakis. No, ma'am, I do not.
General Grosso. Ma'am, I do not.
Ms. Speier. Admiral Burke.
Admiral Burke. No, I do not.
Ms. Speier. General Evans.
General Evans. Yes, ma'am, I do.
Ms. Speier. All right. Of all of you, just one of you has a
Facebook page. I think it would be edifying to you if you all
had Facebook pages because it might help you understand how it
is being used and misused.
General Evans, can you tell me a little bit about your
experience using Facebook?
General Evans. Yes, ma'am. I exclusively use it for family
and close friends, and my experience with it is, you know, I
have had my Facebook duplicated 12 times with public photos,
people establishing a Facebook account in my image. I have had
that happen. But I use mine primarily for family and close
friends.
Ms. Speier. Okay. One of the people that testified at the
briefing suggested that of those who were identified as being
Active Duty, when they actually went and interviewed them,
their picture was not the same picture, but they did have their
name. So there is many ways that you can abuse the system, and
that is why having the kind of social media hygiene, I think is
a good way of looking at it, is really very important.
I know my time has expired, but I would like to ask one
more question of each of the services.
I am very troubled that this has not been addressed. I
think you can understand my frustration. This was first
identified 4 years ago in the Marines and nothing seems to have
taken place. If you have 750--if you have 100 Active Duty
service members who are using social media in a way that is
degrading and dehumanizing, they shouldn't be in the military.
So what I would like for you to do for the committee, and
Mr. Chairman, with your approval, I would like to have each of
the services report back to the committee in 4 months with the
specific actions that you have taken in making sure that the
appropriate education and training is provided to your service
members that is above and beyond what you have done so far,
because I think we know that that appears to be insufficient at
this point in time.
And then if you would, on a monthly basis, in the Marines,
in particular, report to us on the disciplinary action that is
being taken against those who you identify on Marines United.
Mr. Coffman. We will take those--we will take that question
for the record.
Ms. Speier. Mr. Chairman, can I have clarification? Are we
going to--is there any objection to having them report back to
us?
Mr. Coffman. We may have to put it in the National Defense
Authorization Act.
Ms. Speier. Why would we have to do that? They are here
right now. If they are willing to do it.
Mr. Coffman. Oh, if you are willing to answer the question
now, if you have the information now, sure, certainly. You want
them to answer now?
Ms. Speier. I want to have them answer whether or not they
will report back to me.
Mr. Coffman. If I can do this, since we are over, if I can
go to Representative McSally, and then I will go back to you.
Ms. McSally, you are recognized for 5 minutes.
Ms. McSally. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thanks everybody.
Sorry I missed the first part of the hearing. I apologize for
that.
Mr. Kurta, good to see you again. Gina, good to see you
again. Sorry, General Grosso. Thanks for your time and your
thoughtfulness in trying to grapple with this 21st century
challenge that we have in social media. But some of the
discussions we have already had with General Neller both in our
discussions here and in one-on-one conversations is culture,
right? And I know you are here to talk about policies, but
there is also an element of culture in addressing--you know, we
got to make sure we have the right policies to address bad
behavior and that we can take administrative or criminal action
if we need to, and that is important.
But we also got to make sure--we are not going to be able
to police 24/7, from my view, what is going on in somebody's
heart and what they are going to try and choose to do
anonymously, and trying to use all our resources in the
military to chase them down and their activity off duty is not
the best use of our resources, from my view, so we have got to
inculcate in our troops the desire to have integrity and
excellence in character and respect and honor 24/7, which I
know we strive to do and many of us are infuriated and
disturbed that we are finding individuals are not doing that,
right?
My concern, as it relates to scandals like this, is that we
don't have knee jerk reactions in addressing the culture, with
new policies and training and PowerPoint briefings and
everything that we have got to do in order to make sure that we
are responding to Congress and the media and others, that
actually in the end inculcates more resentment towards women,
right? Now we are having to sit through another 5-hour
training, another PowerPoint. I mean, I have seen this, and
those of you who have been around awhile, you probably know
what I am talking about.
And my concern is, you know, we inculcate this culture from
the very beginning when we take civilians and we turn them into
military in basic training, and I still think there is things
that we all need to be addressing, that we are not inculcating
any sort of subtle resentment, you know, towards the other
gender, and from my view, that includes things like integration
of basic training and women should be cutting their hair, and
you know, not having any obvious double standards of a
different experience.
So I just wanted to sort of share that as a statement that
as you all are dealing with this current situation and you are
reviewing training and policies, please keep in mind, when we
are addressing these deeper cultural issues in training, that
we don't overdo it in a knee jerk way that actually has the
exact opposite effect of what we are trying to do.
If we are inculcating resentment towards our female troops
from the beginning, then that actually sows the seeds for
people then having the types of behavior that could come out in
a variety of different ways, if that makes sense.
I did want to ask, I know the Marines is setting up a task
force on this that has been reported. General Brilakis, you are
on that task force?
General Brilakis. Yes, ma'am.
Ms. McSally. Okay. Are the other personnel chiefs
represented here, are there similar efforts going on in the
other services, whatever you want to call them, task force
reviews, whatever, and are each of you represented on those?
General Grosso. Yes, ma'am, there is one in the Air Force
that are represented.
Ms. McSally. Yeah.
Admiral Burke. Same for the Navy.
Ms. McSally. Same with all of you?
General Evans. Ma'am, not at this time.
Ms. McSally. Not at this time. Okay. Are there any reports
of Army--I think there are. Army individuals----
General Evans. Yes, ma'am. I mentioned earlier----
Ms. McSally. Yeah.
General Evans [continuing]. There was a--was made aware of
a Tumblr website where there is a multiservice investigative
task force looking into that, but I am not serving on that
particular task force.
Ms. McSally. Okay. Great. And it is a fair question of are
there millennials on your task force who actually are experts
at this type of behavior and the use of social media. You may
have seen The New York Times article talking about, you know,
former marines that are actually chasing some of these guys
down and doing it in a very swift way that is, you know, able
do that at the speed of social media versus sometimes we work
at the speed of bureaucracy; so are you reaching out to make
sure we have millennials on these teams and people who kind of
can understand the social media environment?
General Brilakis. Ma'am, yes. Men, women, young, old, and
to your earlier point, one of the discussions we had, we had a
2\1/2\-hour meeting with the executive committee today. One of
the discussions in there was about not pointing this back at
our women, at our marines who could typically be blamed for the
reaction of the organization. So we are very mindful of that,
and we want to ensure that we don't--we don't create that.
Because quite frankly, if you talk about respect and
dignity, then we are talking about diversity and we are talking
about religion and sexual preference, et cetera, so this was
brought to the forefront based on the behavior of individuals
in treating women.
Ms. McSally. Right.
General Brilakis. But it goes--if you are talking about
respect and dignity, it is going to go broader than that, and
we work with this.
Ms. McSally. And as you know, even when we are talking
about that, that is a warfighting feature, though, as you know
that. It is not diversity for the sake of it, it is not social
experimentation. It is we become a stronger fighting force. I
know you all know this, but I think it is important because we
sometimes--sometimes people think it is warfighting or
diversity, and that gets characterized as a negative thing. It
is about warfighting capability and having the best team. That
comes with trust and respect and honor and all those things
that you all know well. Any other comments from the other
witnesses?
General Grosso. Ma'am, I am not aware that we have
millennials because you can imagine it was an Air Staff effort,
but we do--as we do this review, we will certainly include them
as we try to accomplish solutions to gaps we find.
Ms. McSally. Is there also--and I have to choose my words
wisely in this. If there is any training that is being
considered related to policies, to make sure that your
soldiers, sailors, airmen, and marines are also aware of when
they post things of themselves in this environment, again, this
is not blaming the victim, but this is when you post something
of yourself that it can be used in ways that are harmful to you
and to the unit and to provide that sort of increased, you
know, situational awareness and just that awareness for some of
this younger generation that maybe doesn't think about that at
the time and they come to us with those habits.
General Grosso. Ma'am, you have identified a gap that we
have found that we need to help people understand. You give
consent up when you post these, meaning it or not, so it is
really what--we are calling it literacy, you know, social media
literacy, just how do you know what happens with things that
you put in the ethernet.
Ms. McSally. Great. Thanks. Anybody else?
Admiral Burke. Ma'am, for the Navy, it is--you know, this
is just one new environment for harassment, bullying, all those
things that have been going on in--frankly, in the past and in
broad daylight. Now they are going on in, you know, more hidden
places, so we are attacking it as an individual's character, so
it is a leadership and courage issue for us, and we are
attacking it from that angle.
Teammates don't treat teammates like that, no bystanders,
you have an obligation to take action when you see shipmates in
need, and we are going after those elements of it. We do have a
very diverse team working this and have taken a multi-aspect
approach going forward.
Ms. McSally. Great.
Admiral Burke. And the products that we have made really do
emphasize the--you know, when you post something, one, don't
assume that because you posted it while you were in your
civilian, you know, role that it--people won't assume you are
in your military role and so on and so forth and it won't get
forwarded.
General Evans. And one of the things we have woven and
integrated into the training at every level, to include a
recent tri-signed letter sent out by the acting Secretary of
the Army, Chief of Staff of the Army, and the Sergeant Major of
the Army, and he also did a video last week of this is to
think, type, post. Think about the communication you are about
to send and who is going to review it; type a communication
that conforms with Army values; and post a communication that
demonstrates dignity and respect for both self and others.
Ms. McSally. Okay. Thanks. I know I am well over my time
but just to go back. Admiral Burke, on the bystander issue, I
think it is critical. Just like the sexual assault, sexual
harassment, you do have the perpetrators, but the vast majority
of people are bystanders. They get that sheep mentality. Nobody
wants to speak out, nobody wants to be looking different and
taking on the wrath of others. That is where it is really going
to be--result is going to be. Sorry. Thank you. I appreciate
it. Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Coffman. Ms. Speier.
Ms. Speier. Just a couple of points of clarification. There
is a very different expectation when you post something on your
Facebook page. That means that many people are going to see it.
But when you text an intimate photograph, an image of yourself
to your lover as a private conversation that subsequently after
you break up is then used in a form of revenge porn, that is
different, and there is an expectation when you post and there
is an expectation when you text, and I think that is very
important to distinguish.
General Brilakis, don't take offense at this. It is very
important for you to hear this and for some of your colleagues
who came and spoke to us at a briefing last week. I didn't
mention it last week, but they used the same term, and it is
inappropriate. The term you just used was ``sexual
preference.'' It is not a sexual preference. It is a sexual
orientation, and it would behoove all of us to use the term
that really is reflective of what is a sexual orientation. It
is not a preference that they are.
General Brilakis. Very well, ma'am, I stand corrected, and
you are correct.
Ms. Speier. Thank you.
Mr. Coffman. Thank you. Ms. McSally, you are now recognized
for 5 minutes.
Ms. McSally. Sorry. I wouldn't have gone so far over if I
was going to get another round. I am actually good, Mr.
Chairman. Thank you. I was following up on the bystander, which
you guys all know. I think that is really critical. Thank you.
Mr. Coffman. And just to inform the committee that we will
be asking for briefing from all the services present, to
include the Department of Defense, in 4 months to receive an
update in terms of what actions you have taken between this
hearing and 4 months. I wish to thank the witnesses for their
testimony this afternoon. This has been a very--this has been
very informative. There being no further business, the
subcommittee stands adjourned.
[Whereupon, at 5:29 p.m., the subcommittee was adjourned.]
=======================================================================
A P P E N D I X
March 21, 2017
=======================================================================
PREPARED STATEMENTS SUBMITTED FOR THE RECORD
March 21, 2017
=======================================================================
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
=======================================================================
WITNESS RESPONSES TO QUESTIONS ASKED DURING
THE HEARING
March 21, 2017
=======================================================================
RESPONSES TO QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY MS. SPEIER
General Brilakis. As has been the case, I expect each of the
commanders involved in these cases to exercise their independent and
unfettered disciplinary disposition authority in reaching their
decisions. Authorities for the various disciplinary actions have
involved, among others: violations of the UCMJ Article 92, (pursuant to
Article 1168, U.S. Navy Regulations, and Marine Corps Order 1000.9A
(Sexual Harassment)); Article 120c; Article 134; and, 18 U.S.C. 2261A
(Stalking).
In United States v. Quick, 74 M.J. 517, decided October 31, 2014,
the Navy and Marine Corps Court of Criminal Appeals held that the
specification under the charge for indecent viewing did not state an
offense under Art. 120c, UCMJ, because the express proscription of the
making or broadcasting of indecent visual recordings implied that the
viewing of indecent visual recordings was not proscribed and that the
specification did not allege that the appellant viewed the victim's
private area but alleged that he viewed a visual recording of her
private area.
NDAA updates, year over year, continue impact the area of military
justice, to include both substantive and procedural changes. For
example, Article 120c, UCMJ--other sexual misconduct--is amended to
correct mistaken indications that it applies to the nonconsensual
broadcasting of an image of a private area where the image was
initially created with the subject's consent.
The National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2018 has
created a new punitive Article 117a, UCMJ, that expressly prohibits
non-consensual distribution of intimate images. Additionally, the U.S.
Navy Regulations of 1990 were modified on April 18, 2017 to include
Article 1168 which prohibits the non-consensual distribution of
intimate images by Marines and Sailors and is punishable under Art. 92,
UCMJ. On May 9, 2017, the MARCORSEPMAN was amended to include
processing for separation is mandatory following the first
substantiated incident of sexual harassment involving a ``[v]iolation
of Article 1168 of the U.S. Navy Regulations including, but not limited
to, the distribution or broadcasting of an intimate image, without
consent, if done for personal gain; or with the intent to humiliate,
harm, harass, intimidate, threaten, or coerce the depicted person; or
with reckless disregard as to whether the depicted person would be
humiliated, harmed, intimidated, threatened, or coerced.''
In general, Art. 134, UCMJ, makes punishable acts in three
categories of offenses not specifically covered in any other article of
the code--such offenses to include ``all disorders and neglects to the
prejudice of good order and discipline in the armed forces, all conduct
of a nature to bring discredit upon the armed forces, and crimes and
offenses not capital, of which persons subject to this chapter may be
guilty.'' Art. 133, UCMJ, applicable to officers, criminalizes an act
or omission that, under the circumstances, constituted conduct
unbecoming an officer and gentleman--i.e., ``action or behavior in an
official capacity which, in dishonoring or disgracing the person as an
officer, seriously compromises the officer's character as a gentleman,
or action or behavior in an unofficial or private capacity which, in
dishonoring or disgracing the officer personally, seriously compromises
the person's standing as an officer.'' Art. 133 includes acts made
punishable by any other Article. Whether or not the conduct described
in the question above may be prosecuted under Arts. 133 and/or 134
depends on the facts or circumstances of each case. [See page 20.]
General Grosso. Air Force commanders can and do use the Uniform
Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) to hold Airmen accountable for failing
to meet Air Force standards, including the standards for conduct on
social media. In addition to holding Airmen accountable for misconduct
committed on social media using Air Force Instruction 1-1 and Article
92 of the UCMJ, Air Force commanders consider the facts and
circumstances of the particular case, which may implicate other
articles of the UCMJ and can result in punishing the underlying
misconduct, regardless of the means or method used to commit it. This
includes charging a violation of Article 120c of the UCMJ for the
sexual misconduct of indecent viewing, visual recording, or
broadcasting. In one such case, an Airman was convicted at a trial by
general court-martial of sexually assaulting an individual, recording
the naked victim, and distributing the recording. The accused was
convicted of sexual assault under Article 120(b) and other sexual
misconduct under Article 120c and sentenced to a dishonorable
discharge, reduction to Airman Basic, seven years of confinement, and
forfeiture of all pay and allowances. Demonstrating that Air Force
commanders can and do use multiple tools to hold Airmen accountable,
another case involved a male Staff Sergeant dancing with a female
Airman First Class while she was topless. With the female Airman's
knowledge, the male Airman video-recorded her dancing topless. The male
Airman distributed the recording to her and her boyfriend. Without the
female Airman's consent, the male Airman also distributed the recording
to a third person. The male Airman was found to have been derelict in
his duties for failing to adhere to Air Force Instruction 1-1 by
dancing with the female Airman while she was topless and lying about
the distribution of the recording to a third person. He was also found
guilty of conduct prejudicial to good order and discipline for creating
the recording and then disseminating it to a third person without the
female Airman's consent. He received nonjudicial punishment of
reduction from Staff Sergeant to Senior Airman, extra duty, and a
reprimand. [See page 19.]
General Evans. The Army has used Article 120c, UCMJ, in punishing
the social media misuse of photographs and video recordings both
through courts-martial and nonjudicial punishment. In FY 2015, for
example, the Army court-martialed a Soldier at Fort Hood under Article
120c, UCMJ for indecent broadcasting of sexual images without the
consent of the subject. The Soldier, who was also convicted of offenses
under Articles 92 and 120, UCMJ, was sentenced to 30 months confinement
and a BCD. In FY 2016, the Army court-martialed a Soldier at Fort
Benning under Article 120c for taking pictures of another's private
area without consent and broadcasting those photographs online without
consent. The Soldier, who was also convicted of offenses under Articles
120 and 128, UCMJ, was sentenced to reduction to E-1, confinement for 9
months, and a bad conduct discharge (BCD). Another Soldier who faced
charges for indecent photographing and indecent broadcasting without
consent was given an other-than-honorable discharge pursuant to Army
Regulation (AR) 635-200, Chapter 10 in FY 2016. In addition to these
courts-martial, the Army has imposed nonjudicial punishment for the
online misuse of photographs and visual recordings in violation of
Article 120c, UCMJ. In FY 2015, three Soldiers received nonjudicial
punishment for broadcasting online indecent photographs or visual
recordings without the consent of the subject in violation of Article
120c. In FY 2016, eight Soldiers received nonjudicial punishment for
broadcasting online indecent photographs or visual recordings without
the consent of the subject in violation of Article 120c. [See page
20.]
=======================================================================
QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY MEMBERS POST HEARING
March 21, 2017
=======================================================================
QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY MS. SPEIER
Ms. Speier. In your service branch, how many people have been
punished for violating the social media policies? What were the nature
of the violations, and to what extent were the perpetrators punished?
Mr. Kurta. This question is best answered by the Military Services.
Ms. Speier. What measures of effectiveness or metric have been
established with respect to your social media policies?
Mr. Kurta. This question is best answered by the Military Services.
Ms. Speier. In your service branch, how many people have been
punished for violating the social media policies? What were the nature
of the violations, and to what extent were the perpetrators punished?
General Brilakis. To date (since the report of misconduct involving
members the Marines United Facebook group), there have been at least
116 subjects, suspects, or persons of interest (hereinafter,
collectively, ``subjects'') reported for alleged online social media
misconduct involving 22 non-DOD civilians and 94 Marines as subjects.
Of the 94 cases in which the Marine Corps maintained at least
administrative jurisdiction, 68 cases have reached disposition and 26
remain in a pending status. In terms of severity of action, there have
been guilty findings at 5 special courts-martial and 1 summary court-
martial; 10 cases adjudicated via non-judicial punishment; 5
administrative separations; 25 formal adverse administrative actions;
and, in 22 cases, no formal administrative action. In each of these
cases commanders have exercised their independent and unfettered
disciplinary disposition authority in reaching their decisions.
Authorities for the various disciplinary actions have involved, among
others: violations of the UCMJ Article 92, (pursuant to Article 1168,
U.S. Navy Regulations, and Marine Corps Order 1000.9A (Sexual
Harassment)); Article 120c; Article 134; and, 18 U.S.C. 2261A
(Stalking). [The investigation into the Marines United Facebook Group
involved a review of more than 120,000 images from over 170 other
websites. Investigators determined that while there were more than
22,000 images with persons depicted who had a possible Department of
Defense affiliation, there were approximately 7,867 images with persons
depicted who had a possible Marine Corps affiliation. Employing
technology to include facial recognition software, investigators
determined that only 68 potential victims were identifiable of the
7,867 images. Further, investigators confirmed 31 of the 68 potential
victims, and only 8 confirmed victims were able to identify a subject.
These subjects are factored into the 116 subjects reported for
investigation and disposition.
Ms. Speier. What measures of effectiveness or metric have been
established with respect to your social media policies?
General Brilakis. The CMC Task Force was established to address, in
part, online social media misconduct includes and is assisted by the
Social Media Awareness and Response Team (SMART) Cell. The SMART Cell
is comprised of representatives from NCIS, Marine Corps CID, among
other offices to coordinate the reporting of allegations of online
social media misconduct from law enforcement to the proper disciplinary
disposition authority and investigation agency for disposition. It is
an enduring function that is expected to be incorporated into the
Office of Personnel Studies and Oversight within M&RA.
To date (since the report of misconduct involving members the
Marines United Facebook group), there have been at least 116 subjects,
suspects, or persons of interest (hereinafter, collectively,
``subjects'') reported for alleged online social media misconduct
involving 22 non-DOD civilians and 94 Marines as subjects. Of the 94
cases in which the Marine Corps maintained at least administrative
jurisdiction, 68 cases have reached disposition and 26 remain in a
pending status. In terms of severity of action, there have been guilty
findings at 5 special courts-martial and 1 summary court-martial; 10
cases adjudicated via non-judicial punishment; 5 administrative
separations; 25 formal adverse administrative actions; and, in 22
cases, no formal administrative action. In each of these cases
commanders have exercised their independent and unfettered disciplinary
disposition authority in reaching their decisions.
Ms. Speier. In your service branch, how many people have been
punished for violating the social media policies? What were the nature
of the violations, and to what extent were the perpetrators punished?
General Grosso. Air Force commanders have a variety of different
tools at their disposal to hold Airmen accountable for failing to meet
Air Force standards, including the standards for conduct on social
media; Airman can also be held accountable for using social media in
violation of Air Force Instruction 1-1 as well as their commission of
the underlying misconduct. As a result, the Air Force cannot provide a
definitive number of all Airmen who have been held accountable for
failing to meet the standards for conduct on social media. However, the
Air Force can provide specific examples of cases that demonstrate Air
Force commanders can and do hold Airmen accountable for failing to meet
these standards. In one such case, an Airman sent a derogatory comment
using Facebook messenger that was subsequently associated with the
Airman's Facebook page. The Airman was found to have been derelict in
his duties for failing to adhere to Air Force Instruction 1-1 on
Facebook and lying about it. He received nonjudicial punishment of
reduction from the grade of Staff Sergeant to the grade of Senior
Airman, suspended forfeiture of pay, and a reprimand. Air Force
standards for conduct on social media are encapsulated in Air Force
Instruction 1-1, Air Force Standards. Issued in 2012 and updated in
2014, Air Force Instruction 1-1 states Airmen ``must avoid offensive
and/or inappropriate behavior on social networking platforms and
through other forms of communication that could bring discredit upon
the Air Force or you as a member of the Air Force, or that would be
otherwise harmful to good order and discipline, respect for authority,
unit cohesion, morale, mission accomplishment, or the trust and
confidence the public has in the United States Air Force.'' Airmen are
``personally responsible for what you say and post on social networking
services and any other medium. Regardless of the method of
communication used, Air Force standards must be observed at all times,
both on and off-duty.'' Airmen who violate Air Force Instruction 1-1
can be held accountable for willful or negligent dereliction of duty
under Article 92 of the UCMJ. In addition to holding Airmen accountable
for misconduct committed on social media under Article 92 of the UCMJ,
Air Force commanders consider the facts and circumstances of the
particular case; this may implicate other articles of the UCMJ and can
result in punishment for the underlying misconduct, regardless of the
means or method used to commit it. For example, pictures of a
subordinate posted on Facebook by a superior may constitute cruelty and
maltreatment under Article 93 of the UCMJ. Comments made via Twitter
from one Airman to other Airmen may amount to indecent language under
Article 134 of the UCMJ.
Ms. Speier. What measures of effectiveness or metric have been
established with respect to your social media policies?
General Grosso. The Air Force has worked very diligently to build
and strengthen Air Force values and our culture of dignity and respect.
That said, Airmen are held to Air Force Standards, as established in
Air Force Instruction 1-1. It states Airmen ``must avoid offensive and/
or inappropriate behavior on social networking platforms and through
other forms of communication that could bring discredit upon the Air
Force or you as a member of the Air Force, or that would be otherwise
harmful to good order and discipline, respect for authority, unit
cohesion, morale, mission accomplishment, or the trust and confidence
the public has in the United States Air Force.'' Air Force commanders
have a variety of tools at their disposal to hold Airmen accountable
for failing to meet Air Force standards, including misconduct on social
media. The Air Force does not track whether a failure to meet standards
occurred on social media, in-person, or in some other forum. As we
conduct our review of current policies and educational curriculum, we
will also examine the use of metrics.
Ms. Speier. In your service branch, how many people have been
punished for violating the social media policies? What were the nature
of the violations, and to what extent were the perpetrators punished?
Admiral Burke. There is no centralized system of records or
database that captures all allegations of misconduct of this nature,
nor is there any system that captures the full range of judicial, non-
judicial and administrative actions that may have been exercised by
individual commanders, commanding officers and officers in charge.
Even for offenses that rise to the level of judicial actions, i.e.,
special and general courts-martial, our Case Management System is
arranged by accused and article violated, and does not lend itself well
to this question since social media policy violations may be
adjudicated under different articles based on the nature of the
offense. Information captured on individual offenses may simply be
attributed to violation of a specific article, or articles, of the
Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), without capturing the level of
detail or data necessary to relate the punishment to social media
misconduct, particularly given the number of UCMJ articles that could
be deemed applicable on a case-by-case basis.
Navy is currently conducting a review of the Case Management System
for offenses related to social media policy violation under UCMJ
Articles 133 (Conduct Unbecoming an Officer), 134 (General Article), 92
(Failure to obey order or regulation), and 93 (Cruelty and
maltreatment). We expect the analysis to be complete in the next
several weeks.
Ms. Speier. What measures of effectiveness or metric have been
established with respect to your social media policies?
Admiral Burke. Social media is one forum by which individuals haze,
discriminate or sexually harass others. These elements of misconduct
are detractors from our positive Navy culture which we routinely
measure. Thus, metrics about our social media policy are incorporated
in general measures of effectiveness of culture or ``Health of the
Force.'' These metrics include:
sexual harassment reports
discrimination reports
sexual assault reports
hazing reports
alcohol abuse incident reports
drug abuse incident reports
domestic abuse and violence reports
suicide and suicide related behavior reports
command climate surveys
Sailor financial readiness metrics
For fiscal year 2016, Navy measured those incidences of sexual
harassment, discrimination, hazing, and bullying that involved social
media or electronic devices.
FY16 Incidents Social Media or Electronic Device
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Incident Reports Substantiated Unsubstantiated Pending Other Misconduct
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hazing 5 2 2 0 1
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Discrimination 2 0 2 0 0
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sexual Harassment 11 5 2 4 0
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bullying 0 0 0 0 0
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ms. Speier. In your service branch, how many people have been
punished for violating the social media policies? What were the nature
of the violations, and to what extent were the perpetrators punished?
General Evans. The Army has punished Soldiers for the misuse of
social media to include the misuse of intimate photographs and video
recordings. In FY 2015, for example, a Soldier was court-martialed for
an indecent broadcasting violation of Article 120c, UCMJ (Article 120c,
UCMJ encompasses multiple offenses, including: (1) indecent viewing,
visual recording, or broadcasting; (2) forcible pandering; and (3)
indecent exposure). He was convicted of indecent broadcasting, as well
as disobeying a lawful order and sexual assault. He was sentenced to be
confined for 30 months and discharged with a bad conduct discharge
(BCD). Another Soldier was court-martialed under Article 133, UCMJ
(conduct unbecoming an officer) for online misconduct including sending
electronic messages of a sexual nature, posting comments of a sexual
nature to a website, and posting photographs to a website. He was
sentenced to be confined for 2 months and to be dismissed.
Additionally, in FY 15 three Soldiers received nonjudicial punishment
for Article 120c, UCMJ indecent broadcasting offenses. Their
punishments included reductions in grade, forfeitures, extra duty, and
restrictions. In FY 2016, a Soldier was court-martialed for indecent
broadcasting in violation of Article 120c. He was convicted of the
indecent broadcasting offense, as well as indecent visual recording,
abusive sexual contact, assault, and assault consummated by battery. He
was sentenced to be reduced to the grade of E-1, to be confined for 9
months, and to be discharged with a BCD. A second Soldier charged with
an Article 120c indecent broadcasting offense was given an other-than-
honorable discharge in lieu of a court-martial pursuant to AR 635-200,
Chapter 10. Eight Soldiers received nonjudicial punishment for Article
120c indecent broadcasting offenses. Their punishments included
reductions in grade, forfeitures, extra duty, restrictions, and
reprimands.
Ms. Speier. What measures of effectiveness or metric have been
established with respect to your social media policies?
General Evans. This is an emergent issue but the Army has directed
the Assistant Secretary of the Army (Manpower and Reserve Affairs);
Deputy Chief of Staff, G-1; Inspector General; The Judge Advocate
General; and the Provost Marshal General to initiate updates to
existing systems to track online-related incidents. These systems
currently track misconduct related to equal opportunity, equal
employment opportunity, SHARP, Inspector General Investigations, UCMJ
disposition, and law enforcement investigations without capturing the
manner in which the misconduct is perpetrated. We also believe that
recent updates to Department of Defense surveys to query participants
about misuse of social media will provide us additional insight.
______
QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY MR. BACON
Mr. Bacon. Do you believe that the UCMJ today gives commanders the
necessary legal authority to identify and hold members accountable for
social media misconduct, both on and off duty, to include the non-
consensual sharing of photos with third parties which may had
previously been shared consensually (i.e. revenge porn cases)?
Mr. Kurta. In consultation with DOD Office of General Counsel, I
believe the UCMJ currently gives commanders sufficient legal authority
to identify and hold offenders accountable. However, as the Navy/USMC
investigations go forward and we find that we require additional
authorities, we will immediately consult with this and all appropriate
Committees.
Mr. Bacon. What service policies, procedures, programs and
resources exist to identify, protect and support victims of social
media misconduct?
Mr. Kurta. This question is best answered by the Military Services.
Mr. Bacon. Do you believe that the UCMJ today gives commanders the
necessary legal authority to identify and hold members accountable for
social media misconduct, both on and off duty, to include the non-
consensual sharing of photos with third parties which may had
previously been shared consensually (i.e. revenge porn cases)?
General Brilakis. The Commandant of the Marine Corps (CMC) takes
seriously and understands the intolerable and corrosive effects that
online social media misconduct has on our institution. He is committed
to doing what is necessary to change the negative elements of within
the organization that have failed to appreciate the core values of
dignity and respect and have ultimately facilitated this problem.
On 14 March, CMC released ALMAR 008/17 which provides guidance for
personnel who, in their personal capacity, desire to make unofficial
posts on the internet regarding Marine Corps-related topics and
guidance for Marines concerning unofficial online activity that has an
adverse effect on good order and discipline within, or brings discredit
upon, the armed forces. Additionally, CMC published a White Letter on
21 March, ``Social Media Guidance-Mandatory Counseling Requirement,''
which mandated, within 30 days, every active duty and reserve Marine,
officer and enlisted, receive a formal counseling confirming that they
read and understand the updated social media guidance outlined in a
message released to all Marines on 14 March. Per Article 1137 of the
U.S. Navy Regulations, ``[p]ersons in the naval service shall report as
soon as possible to superior authority all offenses under the [UCMJ]
which come under their observation, except when such persons are
themselves already criminally involved in such offenses at the time
such offenses first come under their observation.''
The Acting Secretary of the Navy signed ALNAV 021-17 on 18 April,
which changed the U.S. Navy Regulations to include Article 1168,
prohibiting the non-consensual distribution of intimate images. This
Article makes punishable under the UCMJ conduct that might not
otherwise be criminalized under other portions of the Code. In
addition, on 9 May, CMC issued MARADMIN 223/17, modifying the Marine
Corps Separations and Retirement Manual to make administrative
separation processing mandatory in the cases of Marines determined to
have wrongfully distributed an intimate image of another person. These
substantial changes are being undertaken in addition to the many other
legal tools available to implement discipline under the UCMJ in such
cases. Furthermore, the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal
Year 2018 has created a new punitive Article 117a, UCMJ, that expressly
prohibits non-consensual distribution of intimate images.
Additionally, authorities for the various disciplinary actions may
involve, among others: violations of the UCMJ Article 92, (pursuant to
Marine Corps Order 1000.9A (Sexual Harassment)); Article 120c; Article
133, Article 134; and, 18 U.S.C. 2261A (Stalking). Whether or not the
conduct described in the question above may be prosecuted under one or
more of the above-cited authorities depends on the facts or
circumstances of each case.
As has been the case, I expect each of the commanders involved in
these cases to exercise their independent and unfettered disciplinary
disposition authority in reaching their decisions.
Mr. Bacon. What service policies, procedures, programs and
resources exist to identify, protect and support victims of social
media misconduct?
General Brilakis. The Marine Corps is actively addressing online
misconduct through an Interim Task Force. The purpose of the Task Force
is to examine conditions that enable discrimination, harassment, and
disrespect while seeking innovative and holistic approaches to address
destructive behavior. In addition, the Personnel Studies and Oversight
Office has been established to address and implement long term
solutions to online misconduct and related cultural behaviors. This
year the Marine Corps published an update to their social media conduct
policy, specifically addressing unofficial online activity. The policy
outlines how inappropriate behavior impacts morale and core values, as
well as how misconduct may be punishable under the UCMJ. Further, the
Commandant of the Marine Corps mandated all Marines sign a Page 11
entry for their individual record, acknowledging they will adhere to
this guidance. A Leader's Handbook was released, providing tools for
leaders to educate Marines on how to discuss and combat social media
misconduct. In addition, a Social Media Complaint Process for reporting
and tracking was established, to include routing reports to NCIS.
Victims are afforded reporting options and access to supportive
services, to include receiving support from the Victims' Legal Counsel,
Victims' Advocates, and Chaplains. A White Letter was issued directing
immediate action from leaders to support Marines, ensuring all remain
ready to provide immediate crisis intervention, information and
referrals as needed. The Marine Corps has also published a webpage
tailored specifically to support victims of social media misconduct.
The webpage provides various resource opportunities available and
answers frequently asked questions for those seeking information.
(http://www.usmc-mccs.org/socialmediaFAQs/).
Mr. Bacon. Do you believe that the UCMJ today gives commanders the
necessary legal authority to identify and hold members accountable for
social media misconduct, both on and off duty, to include the non-
consensual sharing of photos with third parties which may had
previously been shared consensually (i.e. revenge porn cases)?
General Grosso. Air Force standards for conduct on social media are
encapsulated in Air Force Instruction 1-1, Air Force Standards. Issued
in 2012 and updated in 2014, Air Force Instruction 1-1 states Airmen
``must avoid offensive and/or inappropriate behavior on social
networking platforms and through other forms of communication that
could bring discredit upon the Air Force or you as a member of the Air
Force, or that would be otherwise harmful to good order and discipline,
respect for authority, unit cohesion, morale, mission accomplishment,
or the trust and confidence the public has in the United States Air
Force.'' Airmen are ``personally responsible for what you say and post
on social networking services and any other medium. Regardless of the
method of communication used, Air Force standards must be observed at
all times, both on and off-duty.'' Airmen who violate Air Force
Instruction 1-1 can be held accountable for willful or negligent
dereliction of duty under Article 92 of the Uniform Code of Military
Justice. In addition to holding Airmen accountable for misconduct
committed on social media under Article 92 of the UCMJ, Air Force
commanders consider the facts and circumstances of the particular case,
which may implicate other articles of the UCMJ. For example, pictures
of a subordinate posted on social media by a superior may constitute
cruelty and maltreatment under Article 93 of the UCMJ. Comments made on
social media from one Airman to another Airman may amount to indecent
language under Article 134 of the UCMJ. In addition, misconduct on
social media may be conduct unbecoming an officer and gentleman under
Article 133 of the UCMJ or conduct that is prejudicial to good order
and discipline or is of a nature to bring discredit upon the armed
forces under Article 134 of the UCMJ. Our judge advocates are working
in conjunction with the other Services and the Department of Defense to
review the UCMJ and develop potential modifications thereto that would
allow commanders to more effectively hold Airmen accountable for
misconduct on social media, including the nonconsensual distribution of
certain images.
Mr. Bacon. What service policies, procedures, programs and
resources exist to identify, protect and support victims of social
media misconduct?
General Grosso. The Air Force provides a multitude of resources to
assist victims of crimes. First, Special Victims' Counsel
representation is available for victims of a 120c offense. Air Force
Special Victims' Counsel provide comprehensive representational legal
assistance to assist victims through myriad issues including assertion
of privacy rights, requests for protective orders, and representation
throughout the military justice process, including when cases are
disposed of through an administrative process. Requests by victims of
other social media misconduct would be considered on a case-by-case
basis, taking into account factors such as whether the conduct was
meant to retaliate, ostracize or humiliate the victim and whether the
accused was subject to the Uniform Code of Military Justice. Chapter 7
of Air Force Instruction 51-201, Administration of Military Justice,
outlines support given to victims and witnesses of all crime, including
victims and witnesses of social media misconduct, through the Victim
and Witness Assistance Program (VWAP). This instruction implements the
Victim and Witness Protection Act of 1982 (42 U.S.C. Sec. Sec. 10601-
10605), the Crime Victims' Rights Act (18 U.S.C. Sec. 3771), DOD
Directive 1030.01, Victim and Witness Assistance, and DOD Instruction
1030.2, Victim and Witness Assistance Procedures. The goal of the VWAP
is (1) to mitigate the physical, psychological, and financial hardships
suffered by victims and witnesses of offenses investigated by US Air
Force authorities, (2) foster cooperation of victims and witnesses
within the military criminal justice system, and (3) ensure best
efforts are made to accord to victims of crime certain enumerated
rights. Once an investigation is initiated, a VWAP victim liaison is
assigned to assist the victim with navigating the military justice
system, provide the victim case information, help the victim utilize
military and civilian community resources, and facilitate eligible
victims' access to legal assistance, or attorney consultation for
personal legal issues at no cost to the client. Finally, chaplains and
medical and mental health providers are also available to assist
victims with their spiritual, medical or psychological needs.
Mr. Bacon. Do you believe that the UCMJ today gives commanders the
necessary legal authority to identify and hold members accountable for
social media misconduct, both on and off duty, to include the non-
consensual sharing of photos with third parties which may had
previously been shared consensually (i.e. revenge porn cases)?
Admiral Burke. We assess that the UCMJ provides commanders the
necessary legal authorities to identify offenders and hold them
appropriately accountable for social media and cyber misconduct. Each
case is unique and fact-specific, thus analysis requires consideration
of the behavior, the intent, and its effect. The UCMJ provides a robust
framework for addressing a wide-range of these issues, and in some
cases, authorities beyond those available to civilian authorities.
Below are some examples of articles of the UCMJ which could be used to
address misconduct based on its intent or effect, regardless of the
location or medium used. Such examples include:
Article 92 prohibits a violation of an order or regulation. A
service member could be found in violation of Article 92 and
disciplined for violation of policies on hazing, retaliation,
ostracism, maltreatment, sexual harassment, fraternization, and misuse
of government resources. The article also prohibits dereliction of
duty, which could apply in the absence of a direct order if the
behavior falls below the standards of service customs of naval
personnel.
Article 93 prohibits the cruelty and maltreatment of another
service member. This article could be used to hold service members
accountable in alleged cased of stalking.
Article 133 prohibits conduct unbecoming for officers or
midshipmen. This could afford broad authority to allow application for
such violations as communicating a threat, obstructing justice,
indecent language, as well as other conduct prejudicial to good order
and discipline or that would bring discredit upon the United States
Navy, such as nonconsensual publishing of private/intimate images. This
article could also potentially allow for assimilating state or federal
statutes that prohibit bullying or cyber-bullying.
Although we do not perceive gaps in our authorities, we are
continuing to assess all legal and administrative tools at our disposal
to address this problem. Where we determine internal changes are
necessary, we are committed to making them. If legislative change is
needed, we will come forward and work with Congress to enhance our
ability to prevent and respond to this type of misconduct.
Mr. Bacon. What service policies, procedures, programs and
resources exist to identify, protect and support victims of social
media misconduct?
Admiral Burke. Navy provides support via a 24-hour, 7-days per week
response capability ensuring victim support, worldwide reporting
procedures, and appropriate accountability. Sexual Assault Response
Coordinators, Victim Advocates, Mental Health Providers, Medical
Forensic Examiners, Legal and Chaplain Services all provide a
comprehensive response of professionalism and respect while preserving
Navy mission readiness.
More than responding to a specific instance of misconduct, the
recent ``Marines United'' incident revealed the need to use multiple
methods in a campaign with our service members to ensure our service
policies about appropriate behavior, character, and culture are
understood. Navy's social media policies mirror our general policy, in
that any form of harassment, discrimination, or hazing, on-line or
otherwise, is not tolerated, and is inconsistent with our core values
of Honor, Courage, and Commitment. Our policy provides commanders with
mechanisms to administer judicial or non-judicial punishment as
appropriate. Behaviors that rise to the level of sexual harassment,
whether conducted person-to-person, online, or by any other method, are
covered under this policy. Following the discovery of the ``Marines
United'' website, Navy stood up a Senior Leader Working Group to attack
this issue and get to the root. The Chief of Naval Operations charged
all commanders to talk to their people about what respect for teammates
looks like--at work, at home and online. He instructed commanders to
make it absolutely clear that individuals who do not and cannot live up
to our professional standards in competence and character are not
welcome in our Navy. We are talking about this issue and future
character development in multiple forums--online, via press release, on
social media--to reach our people on every level. We developed several
training products to include Social Media/On-line Conduct Guides for
Sailors, Command Triads, Public Affairs Officers, and Ombudsmen that
plainly explain our policy and expectations of Sailors. Two key
examples of face-to-face training we are giving all Sailors include:
Chart the Course launched in 2016 continued our efforts
to combat destructive behaviors across the fleet while reinforcing and
building upon our Navy Core Values and Navy Ethos. It blends scenario-
based videos with facilitator-led discussion addressing the idea that
all hands must take ownership of enhancing a positive and professional
climate within their commands and work environment.
Full Speed Ahead blends scenario-based videos with
facilitator-led discussions with a unique emphasis on the critical role
of mid-level leaders in addressing and preventing destructive behaviors
and their associated effects on individuals, work centers (micro-
climates), and commands.
We are implementing our Leader Development Framework, part of
Navy's Design for Maintaining Maritime Superiority, which outlines how
Navy will develop leaders who demonstrate both operational excellence
and strong character. Further, we are reviewing our online policies,
guides and training for Sailors to determine how we might improve upon
them. We want to continuously refine our Sailors' tool kits for the
ever-changing online environment.
Mr. Bacon. Do you believe that the UCMJ today gives commanders the
necessary legal authority to identify and hold members accountable for
social media misconduct, both on and off duty, to include the non-
consensual sharing of photos with third parties which may had
previously been shared consensually (i.e. revenge porn cases)?
General Evans. There are a wide variety of tools available to
commanders to combat social media/online misconduct, whether the
Soldier is on or off duty. While there are administrative options, when
it comes to punitive disciplinary options, charging decisions depend
upon many factors. Currently Army Regulation (AR) 600-20, para. 4-19a.
has specific language that addresses and criminalizes, through Article
92 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), ``hazing, bullying,
and other behaviors that undermine dignity and respect.'' These
provisions reference ``social media'' (for hazing) and ``electronic
media'' for bullying. So use of that punitive provision is possible.
Furthermore, transmitting over social media an image made without the
consent of the victim is an offense under Article 120(c)(3), UCMJ.
Additionally, transmitting, receiving, or possessing such images made
either consensually or not, could be criminal under Article 133, UCMJ
(conduct unbecoming an officer and a gentleman) for officers, or under
Article 134, UCMJ (conduct prejudicial to good order and discipline or
service discrediting) for Soldiers and servicemembers generally. There
are additional federal laws that could be charged as well, through
assimilation under article 134, depending upon the crime. The federal
crime of cyberstalking, for example, prohibits a person with an intent
to harass or intimidate someone from using a computer that could
reasonably be expected to cause emotional distress. Other federal laws
prohibit accessing a computer without one's consent, or the
transmission of obscene matters. Of course, the Army is prepared and
willing to assist in providing technical advice regarding social media
legislation if requested.
Mr. Bacon. What service policies, procedures, programs and
resources exist to identify, protect and support victims of social
media misconduct?
General Evans. Army policy prohibits online misconduct and the
mistreatment of persons. Army policy, which is punitive, makes it clear
that such misconduct is prohibited at all times and places, including
when perpetrated through virtual or electronic media. Members of the
Army team experiencing or witnessing online misconduct should promptly
report matters to their chain of command or supervisor. Alternative
avenues for reporting and acquiring information or support include:
family support services, Equal Opportunity professionals, Equal
Employment Opportunity (EEO) offices, the Inspector General (IG), law
enforcement, and the Army SHARP professionals. As appropriate, those
agencies refer complaints to the Commander, the IG, and law
enforcement. Victims of sexually related online misconduct may be
eligible for advocacy services from SHARP/EO professionals, including
referral to mental health services or legal assistance.
[all]