Secretary of the Army Dan Driscoll is planning to shut down many official Army social media accounts to enforce better message discipline and prevent contradictory statements.

Recent studies have warned that the average American spends more than 1,300 hours annually on social media, with some individuals exceeding five hours daily. Among the true “power users” is President Donald Trump, whose social media output has reached unprecedented levels during his second term. For years, the real estate developer-turned-politician has employed social media to broadcast to his base, bypassing traditional “legacy” media outlets. However, there is a concern that the president too often uses social media to release oscillating and contradictory rhetoric, particularly during international crises.

Trump is far from alone in this regard. Across the federal government, it has become all too common for mixed messages to be sent out. The issue is due to a decentralized structure where departments operate independently, resulting in uncoordinated interagency communication and deliberate strategies of ambiguity by leadership to maintain diplomatic leverage.

The US Army is now taking the lead in addressing these concerns.

A late-June memorandum from Secretary of the Army Dan Driscoll called for the consolidation of official Army social media accounts. It would limit official social media accounts to a set list of higher-level organizations, the Army Times reported. Many subordinate units would no longer maintain an official presence on social media.

Under the directive, authorized accounts would be limited to Headquarters Department of the Army enterprise, commands, direct reporting units, Reserve components, designated warfighting formations, including service component commands, corps, divisions, and special operations; as well as designated installations, US Army Corps of Engineers, and Accessions Command.

“These accounts have the dedicated purpose of disseminating timely, factual information about the senior commander’s mission and updates, such as changes to installation services, operating hours, and public safety alerts. Installation Army Community Service (ACS) and Morale Welfare and Recreation (MWR) offices are not authorized separate accounts and will provide content to the installation sites,” Driscoll wrote in the memo.

Should Fewer People Be Speaking for the Army?

The decision by the Army to reduce its social media presence is something that might be considered elsewhere in the federal government. Throughout Trump’s second term, there has been an increase in hyperbolic posts from many agencies lauding the administration, at times seemingly unwarranted.

In addition to the mixed messages, there is a risk of too much information being shared. Limiting the number of accounts should help address that fact.

“There’s a legitimate brand-governance case for what the Army is doing,” Angeli Gianchandani, adjunct instructor of integrated marketing and communications at New York University, told The National Interest via email. “Hundreds of loosely managed accounts create inconsistency and real operational-security risk, and any strong organization periodically prunes its channels. One clear voice is good leadership hygiene.”

However, there are downsides to controlling the message from the proverbial trenches and at the unit level.

“Culture is not built at headquarters,” Gianchandani said. “It is built at the local level, and that is exactly where these accounts lived. For soldiers serving under strict regimens and facing uncertainty most days, and for the families waiting on them, a unit’s social feed was often a morsel of love and connection—a promotion celebrated, a homecoming photo, proof that someone sees you.”

Those channels, at least on the official level, could be shut down on X (formerly Twitter), Facebook, Instagram, and others. Instead of personal stories from the troops, it will likely be about the “big-picture stuff” under Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth, which might mean a greater focus on the “warrior ethos,” warfighting and the devastation that the Army can deliver.

“When you shut down every channel where connection, uplift, and empathy actually happened, ‘one clear voice’ can quietly become one distant voice,” warned Gianchandani. “Message discipline that costs you human connection is not a free win; it is a trade, and I am not sure this one was priced correctly.”

Yet, that may be very much the point too.

“Not being privy to the inner communication of the military, I’d assume the administration wants to control the message even more than they already do,” Susan Campbell, professor of practice in the communication, film, and media studies department at the University of New Haven, told The National Interest via email. “Shrink the aperture, as it were.”

Because so many official accounts could be silenced, the result could be that individual soldiers decide to share their thoughts in an entirely unofficial way.

There may be nothing to stop the “individual [soldier] from sharing dissatisfaction or less-than-positive messages on their personal social media accounts, but then, we’re talking about the official voice of the US Army,” Campbell said.

No Love Lost Between Hegseth’s Pentagon and the Media

The timing of this latest move to shrink the US Army’s presence on social media also comes as the Pentagon continues to limit press access. Hegseth has a well-documented and established history of clashing with mainstream media outlets.

Under his tenure at the Department of Defense, Hegseth has frequently labeled major news organizations “fake news,” and even accused reporters of being “unpatriotic.” Earlier this year, he compared journalists covering the US conflict in Iran to the Pharisees, a biblical group that opposed Jesus Christ.

“The timing is fair to scrutinize,” Gianchandani said. “Coming alongside the Pentagon’s tightening of press access, the optics are of narrowing visibility rather than sharpening voice. Public institutions carry a responsibility for transparency, and leaders own the optics of their decisions, not just the intent.”

Access to the Pentagon by the media has increasingly been curtailed. The friction began when the Defense Department required media outlets to sign restrictive pledges and accept escort rules in exchange for press credentials. Most major news outlets, including conservative ones, have rejected these rules.

That is unlikely to change even as the Army could soon share less information via social media.

“The test will be whether the remaining channels carry those local stories upward,” Gianchandani said. “If they do not, the Army will have gained consistency but lost connection, and connection is the harder thing to rebuild.”

About the Author: Peter Suciu

Peter Suciu has contributed to dozens of newspapers, magazines and websites over a 30-year career in journalism. He regularly writes about military hardware, firearms history, cybersecurity, politics, and international affairs. Peter is also a contributing writer for Forbes and Clearance Jobs. He is based in Michigan. You can follow him on Twitter: @PeterSuciu. You can email the author: Editor@nationalinterest.org.

The post Why Is the US Army Lowering Its Social Media Profile? appeared first on The National Interest.