posted 08-08-2003 09:44 AM               

Call Hollywood! NASA Needs a Makeover!
By Anthony Duignan-Cabrera
Managing Editor, SPACE.com

posted 08-08-2003 10:45 AM               

I for one am sick to death of the goody-two-shoes image NASA tries to put out about the astronauts. It's BORING. In my opinion it is obviously an attempt by NASA to appeal to the greatest number of people (taxpayers), by making sure NO American is offended by anything the agency or astronauts do or say. Well I am offended by the phoniness. Have you noticed that in almost all the individual shuttle portraits the astronauts have their hands folded gingerly in front of them, prominently displaying their wedding ring? This is OK if that is natural, but to me it is staged. And there's too many of them, too. Why do you need 100 astronauts? This agency is going nowhere, figurately and literally.

posted 08-08-2003 12:34 PM               

Initially, astronauts are not movie stars or people to "be seen." They are test pilots, scientists and/or specialists frequently with unique training. They have a job to perform and, I suspect, put in far more hours per week on their tasks than many people. Beautifying the corp. threatens to trivialize the astronaut group and turn them into caricatures.

With respect to public relations, I cannot think of another government agency that is as public oriented or does more for the public as far as promotion than NASA. The educational links are great, the ability to gather free material and information unsurpassed and the availability of astronauts pretty good. Would I love to see more astronauts spending time "in the barrel" and visiting schools and communities, absolutely. There is, however, only so much one can ask of these 120 or so individuals. I will concede that few know the names of many of the astronaut corp. and even fewer know how many men walked on the Moon or what their names were. I am not sure, however, that this lack of current or historical knowledge can be blamed on NASA.

posted 08-08-2003 01:33 PM               

I have been thinking for some time now about NASA public affairs. NASA PAO does a great job of providing information, IF YOU SEEK IT OUT.

Most Americans do not actively seek out information about NASA, and therefore do not benefit from the majority of NASA's PAO efforts.

The next shuttle mission, STS-114, will receive a lot of media coverage because it's the return to flight after Columbia. I would wager that a good amount of the public will tune in to watch what happens with the launch and especially the landing. These events will likey be covered on live network TV.

NASA will have a captive audience!

This could be a GREAT opportunity for NASA to SHINE! Let's show the American public what human spaceflight is all about. Let's show 'em what our shuttle can do! Let's show off the ISS to the millions of people who have never given it a second thought!

C'mon NASA, you need public support. Let's show the people that they have something to be excited about.

posted 08-08-2003 01:51 PM               

quote:

---

Originally posted by WAWalsh:
With respect to public relations, I cannot think of another government agency that is as public oriented or does more for the public as far as promotion than NASA.

---

I can think of one (well, actually its four separate divisions but let's group them all together for sake of discussion): the U.S. military.

Not only do they advertise for recruits (where are the commercials attracting the talented engineers and scientists to come to NASA and "[boldly] go far as you can go" instead of "be all that you can be"), they also release video games to get kids excited (have you seen their Doom/Quake-engine driven "you're in the army now" game?).

They also participate in airshows with exciting jet demonstrations (they even have acrobatic teams for just such a purpose) and have a line of clothing (okay, so they don't market it themselves, but where do you think the camouflage outfits that Madonna and others wear derive their inspiration?).

NASA does an amazing job on the educational and studious side of things -- but if they really want to get the public excited, they need to market the program and the astronauts as the public expects to find its heroes -- white scarves flying in the wind and all. There is a reason kids look to sports figures as their heroes -- and its not because they are better paid or are more physically fit (which is questionable). Its all in how they are marketed...

posted 08-08-2003 01:52 PM            

The problem isn't the astronauts -- the problem is what we do with 'em. The ISS is incredibly boring. The space shuttle is boring. Yes, I'd give my left arm to go --- but to be riveted on TV about it? Nope.

posted 08-08-2003 01:57 PM               

I don't think that the Astronauts want to be celebrities. With public exposure comes public scrutiny.

Liz

posted 08-08-2003 02:06 PM               

quote:

---

Originally posted by lewarren:
I don't think that the Astronauts want to be celebrities. With public exposure comes public scrutiny.

---

Here's an idea then, NASA should hire (yes, pay) former astronauts to be their spokepeople. Many former astronauts are already relying on speaking gigs and endorsement deals to subsidize their post-NASA life. Get those moonwalkers and early Shuttle pioneers into schools, onto television, into the movies, etc. Use their popularity to promote the current corps and current activities.

Professional sports does this all the time. Need a shot in the arm of good PR? Trot out the Hall-of-Famers for a "fan appreciation day".

That said, given the personality types that exist within the astronaut corps, I cannot imagine that there wouldn't be a few volunteers to be the public spokespeople for the program...

posted 08-08-2003 03:14 PM               

PMA (positive mental attitude), my friend.

Your point about 9/11 is valid, but how many people in America will actually attend a launch? A VERY small percentage.

We need to reach people who don't know much about NASA. We don't have to get them so excited that they drive to Florida to see a launch - we need to get them excited enough to be curious, and be willing to part with their tax dollar.

posted 08-08-2003 03:54 PM               

No, the problem with NASA today is not that they aren't going anywhere -- believe me, they would be if they could get the public support and funding to do so -- it is how they are presenting what they are doing. Scott and Rodina, you may not care today about the work on shuttle and ISS, but that's because it hasn't been sold to you. Hire a top notch advertising firm, a professional PR staff and perhaps a Hollywood studio, and I bet you would be singing a different tune (don't believe me? when was the last time you drank a Coke or Pepsi, over a cheaper no-name cola?)

Scott, you were correct that it is not about educating the public -- its about entertaining them.

posted 08-08-2003 03:56 PM               

If you think the science is boring, you simply haven't taken the time to learn about it.

posted 08-08-2003 04:23 PM               

I can line up hundreds (if not thousands) of scientists, engineers, and doctors who would say that the Shuttle/ISS has delivered answers to their lives' work. To belittle their accomplishments as "make-work" is not only an insult to them, but an insult to the thousands, if not millions, who have benefited from their work.

posted 08-08-2003 04:51 PM               

People need to be constantly reminded that we have never spent one penny "up there in space". It's all been spent here on Earth and humanity has benefited from space endeavors by a 7 to 1 margin (or more) for each dollar spent on the space budget.

Also, utilizing the IRS mailout would be a great opportunity, especially at tax time, to remind folks that less than 1/10th of 1 % of the US annual budget is spent on the space program.

NASA has always done an awful job at proactively relaying this information to the people. About a year ago, I heard 4 astronauts on the radio stumbling to answer a caller's statement re: "why we spend all that money out there in space with all the problems we have here on earth". Honestly, I was screaming at the radio - "Tell them! Tell them! Here's your chance! If nothing else, talk about advance storm warnings via weather satellites!" Instead, two of the astros sort of generically talked about the "great view of earth from space" and "how important" the program is!

NASA should give everyone within the agency who makes public appearances a little wallet-sized "cue card" with about 25 basic, relatable, human benefits that we have harnessed as a result of the space program.

Perhaps NASA should hire an ad agency and spent a million dollars a year of their budget to promote the agency's efforts.

OK - I'll pass the soap box now ...

posted 08-08-2003 04:51 PM               

And please be nice to me - it's my birthday today.

[This message has been edited by Scott (edited August 08, 2003).]

posted 08-08-2003 05:07 PM               

If inspirational activities trigger inspiration, than perhaps you can explain why the public lost interest in moonwalks after only 4 missions. Seriously, I think it was said that more people tuned in live to watch the all-night spacewalks during the first Hubble repair mission than did those who watched Apollo 16 live (assuming they could even do so...).

Space exploration cannot all be headlines. Apollo demonstrated that a flag and footprints program was the wrong approach to insure a continued presence in space.

Don't get me wrong, I would love for NASA to set some real goals beyond ISS -- and to their credit, they are, they just haven't shared them with the public yet as they know the public is not yet ready for them -- but to write off the entire STS and ISS programs is overlooking the good work that is being accomplished in the interim.

(Oh, and Happy Birthday!)

posted 08-08-2003 05:10 PM               

But I do have to take exception with the idea that NASA has "crap" to sell. Selling is not just about getting people to buy things they don't want. At its most basic level, selling/marketing is about educating people about what might interest them and making it easier for them to choose among options. In other words, it is about connecting an audience with an interest. (Granted -- that is not the popular conception of marketing, but it is what people who do marketing for a living study when they study marketing beyond just selling 101..., i.e., me. Just saying that selling/marketing is nothing more than pushing crap, is also as pejorative as saying the masses are not smart and only want Chuck E Cheese entertainment. I, too, don't think they are, either.) You point out what "You" want to see and what you find inspirational. That is fine...for you. But what DOES the broader public find inspirational? Has anyone done the market research on this? Has NASA conducted a marketing study not just of the masses, the public, but also of scientists, engineers, politicians, etc. to see what they would like from a space program? Marketing is a discipline -- and if done right, can even be argued to be a science. It has a process...one that doesn't include fooling people into believing that crap is gold, but rahter getting the audiences connected (garbage men/sanitation workers hooked up with the crap; metalurgists and jewelers with the gold <big grin here> ) I would also argue that NASA does on MANY levels conduct very inspirational science -- and not just with the shuttle. Propblem is -- most of it is hidden under the "show" and "perception" of a brand that is still operating on a 1970's marketing plan.

posted 08-08-2003 05:24 PM               

I agree with you. One person's trash is,indeed, another person's treasure. Interest. Perception. Inspiration. All are subjective -- and all have different audiences.

And I think that, in my mind, is one of the ultimate support points for the need for a modern "marketing plan" for NASA.

Personally, I don't think we can forget that the moonshots were, ultimately, political in nature and not scientific. Even for most of the "free world" it was the ultimate soccer game -- the US vs. the USSR. Once the final score went through the net (i..e, landing) the interest feel off.

Sure, other interested parties attached themselves or stayed attached (scientists, space fans, etc.) but the global, universal following dropped off. Game was over. They moved on to other things. In the world of marketing, they were one-off shoppers. But those of us in marketing know that the only way to succeed is to generate repeat business by continuously studying the wants/needs/desires of the ultimate audience to properly build products that meet those needs (not just push on to them what we have).

Thus, given the mutliple POSSIBLE audiences (i.e., consumers of NASA's information, science, and, yes, entertainment), it makes it even more imperative to have strategy/plan to market that to all publics (taxpayers and politicians alike).

Ok. I think I need to shut up now...

posted 08-08-2003 05:45 PM               

...it seems to me that NASA has allowed the discipline of Public Relations (i..e, the focus on perception, spin, and information distribution) rule the roost, rather than the discipline of marketing (i.e., connecting target audience wants/needs with developed product).

posted 08-08-2003 06:16 PM               

quote:

---

Originally posted by Robert Pearlman:
Scott, considering that I have spent the past 10 years professionally marketing space to the public

---

posted 08-08-2003 06:23 PM               

I realize it may not have come across, but I was being somewhat sarcastic.

posted 08-08-2003 06:34 PM               

quote:

---

Originally posted by rjurek349:

...it seems to me that NASA has allowed the discipline of Public Relations (i..e, the focus on perception, spin, and information distribution) rule the roost, rather than the discipline of marketing (i.e., connecting target audience wants/needs with developed product).

[This message has been edited by rjurek349 (edited August 08, 2003).]

---

Very well said Rich. Happy Birthday David! Thank you Robert!

posted 08-08-2003 06:44 PM               

Lots of good points. Happy birthdays all around

I think we could probably all agree on one thing: NASA PAO could use some new blood and new ideas.

Liz

posted 08-08-2003 07:43 PM               

Carrie

posted 08-08-2003 08:19 PM               

quote:

---

Originally posted by lewarren:
Happy birthdays all around

[This message has been edited by lewarren (edited August 08, 2003).]

---

posted 08-08-2003 11:07 PM               

NASA astronauts are now in the midst of a multi-city tour of Major League Baseball cities to continue the message and mission of the STS-107 Columbia crew that is being honored by the Houston Astros throughout their 2003 Season:
http://www.jsc.nasa.gov/jscfeatures/articles/000000002.html

NASA.gov was redesigned and was relaunched (coincidentally) on February 1. For those who remember the old NASA.gov, the new one is tremendously improved, highlighting much more of NASA's many divisions and, more importantly, updating daily.

And as much as I hate to admit it, NASA's embrace of N'Sync's Lance Bass bid to fly to space -- scheduling webcasts and in-person encounters while he was at JSC should be commended for recognizing that tweens and teens would pay attention to NASA simply to see their object of affection. NASA paired Bass with NASA astronauts, and just maybe, some his "cool" rubbed off in kids' minds...

posted 08-08-2003 11:28 PM               

In the whole, however, I think these single, one-off efforts are, indeed, good, but when they are one-off, the effort becomes lost in the noise of all the other things going on in the world. If it were part of an overall "go to market" strategy, in which each effort helped build upon a goal, that would help even more.

You know, this discussion reminds me of Gene Cernan's often remarked comments that NASA should send teenagers into space. Give them a reason to make it real, make it tangible. It is all about making the current space program relevant for the current audience. Given the STS107 tragedy, perhaps the "Kid in Space" program is not feesible right now.

But this is where the Space camps and the Challenger centers are, in my mind, a great idea...and do great work. The virtual email Q&A's from select schools while missions where going were/are also great ideas.

Still, they don't seem to get through to enough of the schools like one would wish. Most likely because of lack of funding or of a focused plan/strategy that makes this a priority. Or perhaps it is the approach of the camps and the centers -- perhaps their method of contact/access is not relevant for the "new generation?" Perhaps the newer generation would rather be a part of a virtual similator on the PC rather than in a "Camp?" (It is a lot like the Symphony Orchestras of the world trying to get kids interested in Classical music. They have a kids night every now and then...but where is the cummulative effect, when they are bombarded every day with their own music and can't get the connection of the daily relevance of the classical music itself via exposure of playing and actually experiencing the joy? What impact could the Syphonies of the world have if they banded together and made the marketing of their music to a new generation a global push? What creative ideas could they collectively generate and execute on that could light a spark and get larger audiences interested in their product?) In the end, it is all about relevance...

I applaud as well the ASF for their work in scholarships to support students to follow their dreams into the field. That is a Johnny Appleseed approach that should get more attention, more funding, and more emphasis -- and not just from a separate foundation, but from the government and NASA itself.

You know -- a program by NASA injected with cash to support scholarships at all levels would be a huge boost. Savings bonds for the young kids, free rides to college for the older kids -- all built on essays researching mercury, apollo, gemini, skylab, the shuttle program. Perhaps even better rewards for future thinking of suggested programs, research studies, etc.

And on the relevance level: How about NASA hosting the ultimate reality TV show: what is it like to be an astronaut. Get 7 wannabees to go through training....see who is left standing. The winner? Becomes a real astronaut.

There are many ways to connect a modern audience with the program...I would just like to see that be a priority...then, when these future kids are future adults and can vote and demand priorities, they can help change congressional focus and support on the space program...and chance the space program's leadership as well...