Not long ago, I received a private message from a high-ranking officer (O-6). See my “Stupid People” article. While I’ve received variations of this question before, his direct inquiry provided the perfect opportunity to address a recurring issue.
The image above was generated for me by Gemini. It’s supposed to be of a disappointed senior leader. Notice the fringe on the flag that is being flown from a flagpole. That’s not authorized and maybe that why he’s disappointed.
The Message and the Misconception
The officer’s question was: “My question for you is why do you publicly comment on posts without privately going to the unit first? From your time in service, isn’t the standard ‘praise in public and critique in private?’ I look forward to your thoughts.”
Let’s correct a widespread misunderstanding. The historical, military, and leadership phrase is not “critique in private” and never has been.
The correct phrase is: “Praise in public, punish in private.” How do you not know that? You don’t know that because you are part of the consistent erosion of standards in the DoD that became prevalent in the 1990s and has continued to the present day.
Countless supposed leadership gurus and modern commentators have twisted the original meaning, softening the word to “critique” or “criticize” to appeal to “itching ears.” This change reflects a growing weakness in society—a fear of “ruffling feathers” or causing discomfort.
I will not soften the message. Getting called out is part of growth. As a leader, you must get tougher. Life—and leadership—will hit you hard. Take the punches, stand back up, and move forward, because people are relying on you.
My Reply: The Need for Public Education
The question about why I correct issues publicly is central to my work. Here is the essence of my response:
Every time an official social media page posts a photo with egregious flag display errors, a backwards color guard, or other protocol violations, two damaging things happen:
- Errors are Validated: Personnel see the official post and assume the errors are correct protocol. They think, why would anyone post something wrong?
- Errors Multiply: They replicate the error in their own actions and then post it. This cycle repeats, and the number of people who see and internalize incorrect flag protocol grows exponentially.
In our current culture, no one reads regulations. We see, we do. Public critiques, while sometimes poorly received due to bruised ego, are essential acts of public education. This is not a new idea. In my studies, I am reminded of the principle:
“Those who continue in sin, rebuke in the presence of all, so that the rest also will be fearful of sinning.”
1 Timothy 5:20 NASB95
I am not comparing protocol errors to sin against God, but the original Greek meaning of sin is “miss the mark.” The photos I critique clearly show a mark being missed.
Accountability is Not a Difference of Opinion
The officer responded, “Thanks… it would appear that we simply have different views of leadership and of what is most important.”
“Different views of leadership”
With all due respect, stop hiding behind semantics. I reject the notion that this is merely a difference of opinion on leadership. “A difference of opinion on leadership” is a dismissive pretense. It’s a polite yet arrogant and ultimately cowardly tactic to dismiss accountability when you have been explicitly called to task.
“And of what is most important”
When you wrote, “…and of what is most important,” you inadvertently revealed a dangerous mindset: the belief that some standards are optional—and that basic duties are mutually exclusive of the military’s “real job.”
This suggests you’ve ranked your responsibilities, placing protocol, regulations, and attention to detail firmly on the bottom. It implies that my focus is on minor details, while yours is on the lofty mission. Your air of superiority is not only insulting but fundamentally flawed.
Standards are Not From a Buffet
In the U.S. military, adherence to all standards is non-negotiable.
- The Oath: We swear to uphold the Constitution and follow all regulations, instructions, and orders that originate from it. It is not a buffet where we pick and choose which standards we follow and which we ignore because we “don’t have time” or “can’t be bothered.” We follow all of them.
- The Slippery Slope of Standards: If a Colonel (O-6) believes the detailed standards for displaying the flag—an internationally visible symbol of our nation and our commitment—are unimportant, where does the erosion of standards stop? How does a leader who dismisses visible, basic, written instructions prove they prioritize the complex, life-or-death instructions?
- Competence and Trust: The sloppiness and ignorance illustrated by a simple flag display error are a direct reflection of the unit’s commitment to competence. If you cannot trust a unit to execute a simple task governed by a clear regulation, why should anyone trust them with more important and complex tasks?
Your colors display was in front of high-ranking U.S. and foreign military with official military photos being taken. The display was extremely important then, and it was even more important BEFORE the conference when it was set up. Opportunity missed is a failure in leadership and preparation, regardless of the mission’s scope.
Conclusion
Leadership involves influencing people toward a common goal, utilizing both positive and negative motivational factors when appropriate. I seriously doubt that a private message from me would have received any serious attention. Sometimes, leaders need a kick in the backside to get moving in the right direction. Public correction is necessary public education. The mission succeeds when the standard is non-negotiable, visible or not.