The second sentence states that the message was sent to the unit (i.e. necessarily via the official message channels as a communication from the unit commander, that being the only way to communicate with "the unit" as a whole).
QED.
And? It was a suggestion to see an inspirational video about a person who overcame huge personal obstacles, right?It was just a link they could follow or not follow, wasn't it? Nor was there any way the wing commander could find out if the recipients had or hadn't followed the link, was there?
Once again, you have shown no evidence that the wing commander, as you rashly claimed, made viewing of a positive, uplifting video a "condition of employment," or of "preferential treatment."
Asserting it repeatedly, and without evidence, somehow does not constitute a persuasive argument.