TABLETOP SCENARIO 2

SPES TABLETOP — SOCIAL MEDIA AS POLICY SURFACE

Title: “The Screenshot Is the Statement”

Designed for:
Strategic Public Engagement Specialist (SPES)

Duration:
90 minutes (can be run in 60 under stress)

Primary stressor:
Velocity + ambiguity + diffusion of authorship

WHY THIS TABLETOP EXISTS

Option 2 tested alignment under interpretive pressure.
Option 3 tests authority under velocity.

This tabletop exists because:

• Embassy social media now functions as policy surface, not amplification
• Screenshots travel faster than clarifications
• Risk is created before review can occur
• Everyone assumes “someone else cleared it”

This is core SPES territory.

STATIC CONTEXT (UNCHANGING CONDITIONS)

• Embassy Dhaka Facebook page has ~500k followers
• Posts are routinely scraped by local outlets
• Past posts have been cited as official U.S. positions
• No formal social media clearance SOP exists beyond PAO norms
• SPES has advisory authority but no posting credentials

T+0 EVENT (THE TRIGGER)

At 9:10 a.m., the Embassy Facebook page posts:

“The United States supports the right of all Bangladeshis to participate freely in their democratic future.”

It is:

• a real sentence (plausible, defensible),
• posted by social media staff,
• not cleared through front office,
• not intended as an election statement.

Within 15 minutes:

• screenshots circulate on Bangla Twitter/X,
• an activist account adds: “U.S. backs free election — pressure coming.”
• a local TV ticker runs:
  “U.S. Embassy signals concern over election conditions.”

COMPOUNDING EVENTS (INJECTS)

Inject 1 (T+25 min)

A journalist emails PAO:

“Can you clarify whether this post reflects a change in U.S. policy?”

Inject 2 (T+35 min)

POL Section flags that:

• the phrasing mirrors State press briefing language, but
• timing makes it politically sensitive.

Inject 3 (T+45 min)

An opposition MP tweets the screenshot with commentary.

Inject 4 (T+60 min)

Washington sends a Slack message:

“We’re seeing your Facebook post circulate. What’s going on?”

THE SPES PROBLEM (CORE)

No one disputes the truth of the sentence.

The problem is:

• where it appeared,
• when it appeared,
• and how it is being recontextualized.

SPES must now decide:

• whether this is a messaging issue, a policy risk, or a process failure,
• and how to intervene without becoming the de facto censor.

PHASED EXECUTION

PHASE I — CLASSIFICATION (10–15 min)

SPES must classify the event correctly.

Options:

• Benign amplification
• Ambiguous policy signaling
• Attribution drift
• Process failure

Failure mode:
Treating this as “just social media noise.”

PHASE II — RISK SURFACE MAPPING (15 min)

SPES must identify four distinct risks:

1. Attribution Risk
   (“Embassy Facebook = official policy”)
2. Temporal Risk
   (Election proximity changes meaning)
3. Screenshot Persistence Risk
   (Deletion ≠ erasure)
4. Precedent Risk
   (What this normalizes for future posting)

Each risk must be:

• stated plainly,
• assigned a notional owner,
• and marked as accepted / mitigated / unresolved.

PHASE III — RESPONSE OPTIONS (20 min)

SPES must develop three options, each with tradeoffs.

Examples (structure, not prescribed content):

• Option A: Leave post up; issue background clarification
• Option B: Edit post; publish follow-on clarification
• Option C: Remove post; internal explanation only

Each option must include:

• downstream consequences,
• how Washington will read it,
• what precedent it sets.

Disallowed:
“Best practice is…”
This is situational judgment.

PHASE IV — PROCESS INTERVENTION (20 min)

This is where SPES proves their value.

SPES must answer:

• What process failed?
• What guardrail would have prevented this?
• How do we fix it without freezing output?

Expected SPES move:

• Propose a posting risk tiering system
• Propose language red-flags
• Propose when SPES must be consulted

PHASE V — RECORD & FORWARD ACTION (15 min)

SPES must produce:

1. A one-page incident note (internal)
2. A decision log entry
3. A process change proposal

No rewriting of the Facebook post is required.

WHAT THIS TABLETOP TESTS

COMMON FAILURE MODES

• “It’s technically correct” defense
• Overreaction (panic deletion)
• Underreaction (do nothing)
• Personalizing blame to social media staff
• Treating SPES as content editor instead of risk architect

WHY THIS IS SPES-SPECIFIC

No other role:

• spans content + policy + risk,
• sees pattern over time,
• or is positioned to redesign process without owning output.

This tabletop cannot be solved by:

• PAO alone,
• Legal alone,
• or Washington guidance.

It requires SPES-level synthesis.