posted 08-08-2003 11:36 PM               

In the meantime, it struck me as odd as I got the spash page intro that I skipped through. It said, "Welcome to the New NASA." And right there my bulls*** meter went off. The new NASA? The only thing that is new on the site is the eye candy approach. There is nothing fundamentally "new" about NASA. Hell, the STS-107 report and recommendations aren't even done yet. We are not in a new budget year. The director hasn't announced a bold new system-wide redesign of the agency. No. It is not a "New NASA" but a new, prettier website...i.e., it is just cosmetic...and, perhaps, symptomatic of the problem...And then I think, "perhaps I am being too picky..." but then I think, "Nooooo...this is the issue. This is PR over true marketing. This idea that if one puts a pretty wrapper on it, it will work...but it doesn't go deep enough...it doesn't address the problems COMPREHENSIVELY and at the core...it is a noble attempt at a one-off..."

Just another thought...

posted 08-09-2003 01:20 AM               

I'm not just talking about money - there are great programs in which students can work and train with researchers at NASA centers.

NASA also provides fantastic learning materials for teachers K-12. NASA offers special opportunities for teachers - they just have to know to ask.

posted 08-09-2003 09:06 AM               

One of the reasons that astronauts appear to be bland is that the unofficial motto of the astronaut office is "don't screw up." While this applies to technical work, it also sets the tone for public appearances. Bland, non-controversial remarks are "safer" for a current astronaut who wants to get a flight assignment. Look at what happened to Mark Lee when he made waves about the EVAs required for the space station assembly. Read about George Aabey's autocratic reign in Dragonfly. It's safer for an astronaut to be studiously non-controversial.

Astronauts suddenly become more opinionated when they leave the program. For example, I enjoyed Walt Cunningham's observations in the new edition of his book.

NASA has a culture of "don't rock the boat." This makes for a less interesting public personality (and also for the Challenger and Columbia acidents).

posted 08-09-2003 10:20 AM               

I never doubted all the good programs at NASA for kids and scholarship opps. The moon rock thieves pointed out the increadible access students can have at NASA. But your comment on K-12 materials for teachers hits my main comment (this blah blah about PR vs. Marketing) right on the head, "They just need to know how to ask."

The push approach to PR creates and distributes, but I still think NASA needs a better plan to pull (i.e., market to) the target audiences.

I still don't think the astro's need a better image. I think they have a great one. They just aren't getting the exposure. (Ala the Life magazine days.)

Anyway -- thanks for pointing those programs out to me. David -- you, too.

PS: The other thought, too, is -- NASA has great product, but if no one is "buying" the product, what is the reason? You can't say unless you do comprehensive market research. You can venture a guess that the astros don't have an exciting image anymore. Or you can venture (missguided as I was) that there aren't enough outreach programs. Or you can venture that there isn't a good mktg/pr strategy (maybe there is, maybe there isn't). But you don't know for sure.

posted 08-09-2003 04:08 PM               

So, in regards to marketing space, would there be a way to involve existing space enthusiasts in getting people connected with space? If yes, how would you involve them? Or are space enthusiasts best left to doing their own thing, while the media or a marketing company does its?

Also, it's not only NASA that should be thinking about marketing...let's hope the X-Prize competition and similar undertakings try to reach out effectively as well.

One more comment on the article - I can't believe the author complained about the orange and blue flight suits...uhhh, they have to be orange for safety reasons, and am I the only person who thinks astronauts look great in those blue flight suits?!? I don't think so

posted 08-10-2003 02:54 PM               

This is arguing that if NASA were offered a plan that would capture the world's interest for a decade and net them billions of viewers at the completion of the task it wouldn't be worth the effort because the same viewers might watch 'Six Feet Under' the next night.

The public didn't lose interest after three landings. They lost interest after three landings, two circumlunar voyages, nearly twenty orbital missions, and two sub-orbital flights. Space walks, space rendezvous, space dockings and one horrific disaster. Each of these flights, even the least memorable, generated coverage that the current programs can't hold a candle to.

The path to Mars would be a long one that, if clearly marked out, would hold people's attention for years. So what if the night after the landing they watch something else? When the show's over you go home.

I'd also add that nothing holds our attention indefinitely, but some things stay with us forever. My father still gets a gleam in his eye when he tells me how he listened to the Apollo 11 landing on the radio, his heart in his mouth.

It doesn't matter if he watched the Apollo 15 landing or not, the excitement of the space-race planted a seed of interest and goodwill towards space exploration that has stayed with him. His generation is aging and NASA has not planted that same seed of interest in the younger generation.

If they don't grasp the necessity to astound us once more as they astounded us thirty years ago then ultimately they will be of no more interest to the man in the street than any other bunch of remote, white-coated scientists.

They are building newer faster space craft, designing new EVA space suits, and sending probes to Mars anyway. Why don't they tie it into a single program and tell us about it?

posted 08-11-2003 02:52 PM               

NASA is looking for innovative and "out-of-the-box" ways to tell the nation about the agency's projects and programs. NASA is looking to the private sector for suggestions to help keep the American public informed about the space agency.

Here's the idea: NASA information could appear on a consumer product, be included as an insert in the packaging, or be delivered by a service. NASA is particularly interested in opportunities that are popular with students and those under 35 years old. NASA hopes to inform the public, while also inspiring the next generation of explorers.

Organizations that produce, market or distribute popular products or services may submit proposals to NASA Headquarters by 4:30 p.m. EDT Oct. 3, 2003. The solicitation is entitled, "Seeking Offers to Disseminate NASA Information by Means of Consumer Products or Services."

posted 08-11-2003 07:56 PM               

My part will be to take the news release and email it to the "Contact Us" sections of some of my favorite game and merchandise companies, and suggest they look into it. Anyone else "game" ?

posted 08-11-2003 08:38 PM            

Contacting astronauts and cosmonauts is frustratingly hard, as you can only go through the "Ask the ISS crew" on the NASA site if you want to e-mail them, and none of mine have yet got through. They might as well live in a parallel universe! Making them more accessible - such as allowing them to have their own websites - would be great. Create a fan club for them!

This may sound trite, but I reckon that this form of publicity would appeal to a lot more people than any amount of tedious blathering about science.

posted 08-12-2003 10:11 AM               

In 1996, I founded "Ask An Astronaut", the first online site that provided direct access to the men and women who explore space. The format was basically a question and answer -- the public submitted questions, the editor (myself) selected the most popular or best submissions, and the featured astronaut for the month would answer the top 20 or so queries, as well as five frequently asked questions (i.e. How do you go to the bathroom?).

In 1997, we were receiving 10,000 to 15,000 questions per month. Remember, in 1997, the number of people on the web were several orders of magnitude less than they are today.

An open forum on NASA's website, where anyone could post, would not only result in the perception that astronauts weren't interested in answering questions (when in fact, it would just be the sheer logistics preventing them from doing so for 95% of the questions received) but would be a moderation ngihtmare. Millions of people visit the NASA website.

(Anticipating that someone might raise Edgar Mitchell's board as an example, he doesn't advertise his site and so I imagine the his traffic is considerably less than what NASA receives. That said, I wish more retired astronauts would take Mitchell's lead. What he has done with his board is amazing...)

Don't get me wrong, I'd love to see the astronauts more accessible, and the occassional live web chat might be the answer, but we should be realistic with what we propose NASA implement.