"There are a lot of things that need to be done to improve communications"
About this Quote
A sentence like this is what bureaucracy sounds like when it’s trying not to leave fingerprints. “There are a lot of things” is a soft-focus opener: it acknowledges failure without naming any specific failure, any specific decision, or any specific person who made it. The passive, airy phrasing (“need to be done”) keeps agency offstage. No one messed up; tasks simply materialized. In Washington-speak, that’s not a flaw. It’s a survival tactic.
Feith’s career context matters here. As a senior Defense Department official in the run-up to and early years of the Iraq War, he operated inside an ecosystem where “communications” wasn’t just about press strategy or interoffice memos; it was the bloodstream of legitimacy. When messaging collapses, it’s rarely because talking points were clumsy. It’s because the underlying story no longer matches reality, and reality has started leaking through.
The brilliance, such as it is, lies in the quote’s vagueness. It can be read as a mild managerial observation, a plea for better interagency coordination, or a preemptive alibi: if the public is confused or unconvinced, the problem is the transmission, not the content. “Improve communications” doubles as a political solvent, dissolving hard questions about intelligence, accountability, and consequence into the safer realm of process.
It’s also an implicit admission that power depends on narrative discipline. The line doesn’t promise truth; it promises refinement. In that gap between “communications” and “facts,” you can see how modern governance often protects itself: not by winning the argument, but by adjusting the channel.
Feith’s career context matters here. As a senior Defense Department official in the run-up to and early years of the Iraq War, he operated inside an ecosystem where “communications” wasn’t just about press strategy or interoffice memos; it was the bloodstream of legitimacy. When messaging collapses, it’s rarely because talking points were clumsy. It’s because the underlying story no longer matches reality, and reality has started leaking through.
The brilliance, such as it is, lies in the quote’s vagueness. It can be read as a mild managerial observation, a plea for better interagency coordination, or a preemptive alibi: if the public is confused or unconvinced, the problem is the transmission, not the content. “Improve communications” doubles as a political solvent, dissolving hard questions about intelligence, accountability, and consequence into the safer realm of process.
It’s also an implicit admission that power depends on narrative discipline. The line doesn’t promise truth; it promises refinement. In that gap between “communications” and “facts,” you can see how modern governance often protects itself: not by winning the argument, but by adjusting the channel.
Quote Details
| Topic | Team Building |
|---|---|
| Source | Help us find the source |
More Quotes by Douglas
Add to List









