Poignant Video: NASA - The Frontier Is Everywhere (Update)

"damewse" - Contact me at alan.ladwig@nasa.gov. I'd be happy to listen to your ideas.

That's a stirring piece, and I thank you for it.

But, you know, I could imagine such stirring pieces about a lot of things our nation does. That is, if this is about marketing for NASA, there is nothing in here that might not be paralleled by many other agencies. Curing diseases, housing the homeless, protecting natural resources, harvesting same natural resources to benefit society, etc. etc. Could make some awesome videos about all those.

That NASA seems incapable of doing this is your point, I guess.

But at least for NASA science, the results market themselves, and those results engage and excite the public. NASA science doesn't need marketing videos like these. That scientists and engineers getting these results are often only marginally competent at public relations can be forgiven. The public is strongly interested in the NASA science program. The mission is clear.

But human space flight is where the problem is, isn't it? We have astronaut "explorers" who "explore" by strapping themselves onto a rocket, doing somersaults, and playing with their food, as well as doing some experiments. But it's hardly engaging, and rarely anything that seems new. What's missing is an overriding mission, not marketing. So a social media department like you propose would face a major hurdle, in that the mission would remain unclear, and the response to that lack of clarity would be beautiful, entrancing, artistic ... handwaving.

The challenge is facing up to the mission, not the marketing. Marketing is what you need when you don't have a self-evident mission.

Very nicely done. Very moving. And precisely the sort of thing NASA is forbidden from doing, by law. NASA is not permitted to market itself, nor is any government agency.

NASA is required by law to disseminate information on what they do (and yes, they're not terribly good at that). So they often have to walk the fine line of dissemination without self-promotion. This sort of commercial would fall way past that line as blatant self-promotion by a federal agency using federal funds.

Though certainly your talent could be of great benefit in the dissemination of information by NASA, and/or for the promotion of space exploration objectives by independent organizations. I hope you get some contracts out of this.

(By the way, I didn't see Carl mentioned in the credits. Maybe his voice was from one of the other things in the list of credits? Also you misspelled the Marantz web site address in the credits.)

Kudos Allen on the prompt and openminded response. My question is would the response have been the same had the message come through channels inside NASA instead of a public forum? I'd like to think the answer is yes.

Very nice work. Thank you and I agree with Mark that NASA can not promote itself but why can't the contractors? I also agree with Harris Tweed in that if you have a grand mission or a great product it sure makes it a lot easier to build a moving story and garner support from the voters and congress.

NASA seems to have lost their way of late I guess due to the fact that it has been forced to become a political organization whip sawed be each new president and congress. Too small a budget to matter in WDC yet too large a budget to be left out of politics.

Or maybe we've lost our way as humans and don't have the passion or attention span to dream big dreams any more. Maybe it is our fault and not that of the government. If there was a grand mission that humans stood up for and really wanted - my guess is WDC would support it as they like large government programs.

Or could it be that we as a species have peaked in technology and can't get outside our own solar system to thus build a grand story.

Maybe a combination of all the above or none - what do I know - but it is clear that NASA has lost its way for now and I hope one day they will find themselves and bring it all back together so we can live up to our genetic program to explore the universe.

Come on NASA make 2011 your year to return to adventure and exploration. Most of us are pulling for you!

"Marketing is what you need when you don't have a self-evident mission."

I disagree. First, marketing strategy is an important aspect of figuring out why you are doing what you are doing. If you do not have a strategy and rationale that you can simply explain to others, then do you even have a 'self-evident mission'. Look at Constellation. A great example of a program that was going off in a direction that the people in charge, like the former Administrator had no idea why he was doing it - he had an entire entourage - $2 or 3 billion dollars worth of people, program managers and public affairs and engineers and NASA and contractors and all their jobs depended on it, yet they could not put into a clear statement what they or doing and why - let alone trying to communicate it.

You don't have to call it marketing. You can call it communications or education. As other bloggers point out, these are elements of NASA mission.

ISS today suffers from much the same problem. Today, for some reason, NASA and the ISS program have decided that its really all about science and research. Thats interesting and maybe there is something to be said for science and research being done on ISS, and someday maybe something really beneficial will come of it, but Ronald Reagan approved Station because of the potential for industry and commercialization, yet NASA seems to have lost sight of that reason. The NASA Space Station Program does not even seem to recognize why it exists. I do not see NASA going out to industry and trying to sell them on the idea of doing product development on the ISS. Or two other big reasons for ISS - it is multi-national in scope - that was the reason it survived Clinton in the early 1990s, and yet there is little said about the value to the US of the multi-national aspects, and its a great engineering achievement in which we are learning a lot about how some new kinds of systems work, things like closed loop ECLSS, and yet NASA hardly talks about it. The last year was when the culmination of the ISS assembly was taking place, and there should have been major celebrations for such a great engineering achievement, and yet based on the current NASA information you would be hard-pressed to even know when to call the assembly of ISS to be complete. If you ask the engineers/engineer manager at NASA what marks the completion of ISS, they would probably go into a long winded explanation of how there is still a permanent MPLM yet to go (even though MPLMs have been flying for fifteen years, or that there are other Russian pieces still coming and still on the drawing board or...they might explain they were really waiting until the last Shuttle flight so they could celebrate the two together; marketers would have been looking for another big event to celebrate; NASA looks for fewer events so it can simplify activity for its management. Who knows and who cares? It is a difference in philosophy. Fact is, the big event happened sometime in the last year or so, when ISS was completed to the stage at which it looked like the originally identified configuration of 1987, and Keith Cowing knew it, but NASA missed the event and the celebration. It was simply a great opportunity for NASA to explain to its stakeholders what it had accomplished and why it was important. NASA missed it.

NASA is an engineering organization run by a bunch of engineers who basically do not give a damn about how or why to explain; they think someone will notice if they do something great, yet the same engineers don't recofnize whats great or why. Other major companies and industries put big resources into business marketing for reasons of survival, development, and expansion. They make sure they put the available resources into communication and education. NASA, its contractors, and much of the industry don't share this view.

It shows. Simple cause and effect. NASA is in serious trouble for exactly this reason.

Love it.

NASA astronauts really haven't been allowed to explore the New Frontier since Nixon decommissioned NASA's heavy lift capability back in the early 1970s. The Space Shuttle and the ISS programs are really just symbols of manned exploration-- but not real manned space exploration, IMO. And I think that most Americans know the difference.

NASA is a big government program that exist during a time when there is constant right wing propaganda against big government programs. Ironically, some of the emerging private commercial spaceflight companies have joined in with the anti-government propaganda against NASA while accepting money and purchasing technology from NASA and trying to get NASA contracts.

Its also ironic that many anti-government Republicans have been the strongest proponents of NASA. Of course, many Republicans view NASA as part of America's defense program: the military is a big government program that Republicans have always supported:-)

Since several private American companies have strongly benefited from their relationships with NASA, it would probably be in their best interest to start spending some of their funds aggressively touting the public and private benefits of our government space program on television and on radio and the benefits of manned and unmanned space travel in general.

Marcel F. Williams

Hey NASA... Did you see this video this kid produced?

http://youtu.be/NXkuo1yihjs

Safe for work... You need this kid and more like him. Many of us here don't understand the lack (none) of NASA's promotions; but this kid gets it.

Very good video IMHO.

VR
RE327

Sorry, but all the marketing in the world is not going to sell "Block 3 Apollo" NASA has proven to be a can't do organization.

BS. Marketing is not about selling. Marketing at its essence is storytelling. And NASA, since about 1970 or so, has sucked mightily at telling its stories.

I'm with Damewse. I would happily work for NASA at $1 a year on his marketing campaign. I'm sick and tired of cringing at what I see from NASA.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_3BxBeLzbg8

Editor's note - thanks for posting this link. It is NASA's "Reach" video. Readers of NASA Watch will recall that I am very fond of this video and think that it is one of the most amazing things NASA has ever done in this genre.

Lovely sentimental video. Wonderfully produced. Carl Sagan is great. Inspiring and educating.

But Carl Sagan is dead, and so is Apollo, and shortly so is Shuttle. Talk about a problem. The marketing material happened before the marketing staff were born.

NASA is apparently a museum artifact.

I'm guessing he made it with leftover pieces from this: http://vimeo.com/2822787

Yeah, Carl started it all for me. I miss him.

"First, marketing strategy is an important aspect of figuring out why you are doing what you are doing."

I think we're largely in agreement here, and you've made a compelling statement. But it's a chicken-and-egg thing. What comes first? The marketing or the mission? I'd like to believe it's the latter.

Let's go back to "Damewse"s frustration about NASA. NASA does great things, but can't express what it does to the nation. All it needs is for someone with marketing and communication savvy to explain it he/she says, and then everyone will agree, and dollars will flow freely. Nope. Because with regard to human space flight, NASA doesn't know what it wants to do. It hasn't even managed to express it to itself. NASA strategic plans are all about "exploration" and "inspiration" without a shred of a clue of what those things really mean and what real value they offer the nation. Those two words are basically defined for space advocates by Apollo, but Apollo is ancient, with regard to both technology and policy and is a model that is now unaffordable.

Now, the exasperation with NASA is somewhat ill-placed. NASA is just the implementing agency. That the agency is run by a bunch of engineers who basically do not give a damn about how or why to explain what they do has to be forgiven at some level. That human space flight doesn't have an overriding mission is in many respects the fault of the White House and Congress. An administration that has far too much on its plate, and a Congress that is mostly all about funneling dollars into districts. The overriding mission for NASA is a hot potato that the White House, Congress, and NASA toss back and forth, hoping that someone can grab it and come up with something the American people will want to invest in. But it hasn't happened yet.

In many respects, the purpose of human space flight is clear. It's about expanding human presence beyond the Earth. But why? That's what the taxpayer should be hearing. That doing this is our destiny, or that human space exploration is noble and awe-inspiring, or that we need to take our shovels and wheelbarrows up to harvest celestial resources is just mental doodling. This nation has never really been challenged to figure out what it's all about, and until that happens, we'll desperately seek out marketing strategies that are flexible enough to embrace just about anything.

Larryman.....................

This is NOT ATS.com you will not be engaged on these subjects.

Spiff........................Out

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_3BxBeLzbg8

Editor's note - thanks for posting this link. It is NASA's "Reach" video. Readers of NASA Watch will recall that I am very fond of this video and think that it is one of the most amazing things NASA has ever done in this genre.

This is the sort of program
http://www.tsgc.utexas.edu/nmb/
Alan Ladwig ought to get behind; maybe he has to re-initiate it first. This program chartered marketing, communications and other college students all over the country to create the messages. NASA cancelled it last year.

Editor's note: I know for a fact that Alan is very, very fond of this video "Reach". And, oh by the way, his wife had a lot to do with the specific project at NASA ESMD that created this video in the first place.

On a somewhat irrelevant note:

I see in some of the posts in this thread the same tendency that has been appearing in other threads — the tendency to refer to "NASA" as if it were a single entity, with a single opinion, a single set of goals, and a single agenda (or lack of).

Of course, this isn't the case, and many of the statements and suggestions that we've all been making are not really valid because NASA is not a single entity, but rather an organization comprised of many thousands of people, who can be grouped in many different ways, each with their own opinions, goals, and agendas.

Combine that with the fact that most of us only know those facts and events which make it into the public media (sometimes by questionable paths).

Perhaps we should be more precise and refer specifically in our comments to whatever "part" of NASA is relevant to any comments we make.

Just something that I noticed.

Steve

All three videos are quite good. I think NASA does a fairly good job at social media. That doesn't mean they couldn't do more to promote themselves however.

NASA may be prohibited by law from marketing themselves but that's not a deal breaker by any means. NASA could easily advertise for recruitment (like the military) and kill two birds with one stone.

I've always thought NASA missed a big opportunity with the release of Avatar to run some sort of trailer along with the previews. There are numerous ways it could have happened. It would have been a perfect setting with the ideal audience and the technology was there to really wow people, especially in 3D theaters.

On the social news website Reddit.com a mini-movement inspired by this video has sprung up to make more of these pro-Space / pro-NASA videos.

See: http://www.reddit.com/r/self/comments/f0b16/dear_reddit_lets_become_nasas_pr_department_lets/

Why NASA? I just watched the video and listened to Sagan's words and I'm struck with the idea that this won't necessarily be enough to inspire taxpayers and representatives to send NASA more money but it might inspire the Musk and others like him to take things into their own hands. Hopefully the fortunate few billionaires among us will realize that they can't sit back and wait for the future to arrive. They can instead be an intricate part of steering humanity's destiny. NASA certainly has a role in that, being enablers of certain things and maybe seeding other things, but the goal is space, humans in space, not just "NASA"!

If NASA can review fiction movies and fund rockets that will never fly, they can make videos that spell out their mission. It is not a matter of marketing, it is a matter of having competent public affairs. Read Keith's blogs for any two weeks in the past ten years to get an idea of how well they are doing in public affairs.

As much as I like Carl Sagan, this video is not really all that encouraging.

"It will not be we who reach Alpha Centauri and the other nearby stars. It will be a species very like us"

OK - the way I read this is, Carl states the human species will not be going beyond the solar system. Rather, it will be some other species decended from Homosapiens that goes. So much for near term dreams, goals and confidence in our own species. Guess NASA and the other space programs may need to close up shop untill evolution has a chance to catch up.

I respectfully disagree with Carl and am sure Homosapiens will eventually move on to Alpha Centauri.
The thing that was great about Star Trek was that despite some very hard centuries, humanity made it to the stars and continued to explore and settle new worlds.

I have an idea, perhaps we could start this grand adventure with the next simplest incremental step.

Since we have only visited the Moon as tourist, we could go to the Moon for real and set up shop. This will give us a WAY STATION on our way to longer destinations and then eventually Alpha Centauri.