Product Placement on the ISS (Update)

Our tax dollars at work. Congrats to Cady for her proactive approach to utilizing the ISS - AND what enthusiasm!!!!!

I am LMAO at this.

With all the other despicable behaviors we witness on a day-to-day basis from world leaders to common people, here we have a highly educated, goal oriented, professional (Cady Coleman) who helps another friend out, who is likely the same kind of person (Charlie Steele), from which the blogosphere / some of the media crticize as "product placement", and probably "elitism".

Ridiculous. Totally absurd. We ought to be happy that like-minded professionals who have personal standards are collaborating, and sticking together.

At the rate things are going, all of us who believe in a future for our race are going to have to stand against the mouth-breathers who continue to spew this kind of nonsense, and worse.

Stand your ground, Cady.

You are setting a great example, and a lot of us, far more that I can count, support your efforts.

You have missed the total point of the blog - that things happen to us in life, opportunities, jobs, etc, when we take the time to create real relationships and nurture them. It is not a blog about product placement, it is about what happens when you have relationships with others, some even out of this world. Cady wanted to read the book, asked for it and took it with her.

This is actually where NASA went wrong years ago. Instead of creating and nurturing a relationship with the American taxpayers, they got cocky and figured they could do it their way and we would all follow.

Editor's note: No, you overtly referred to this as a "product placement" - a commercial activity - and did so on a blog that is overtly about marketing and advertising. Yet you have no existing commercial relationship with NASA whereby you could do this. Why aren't other taxpayers able to do what you have done utilizing government assets, personnel, and resources - at no cost to you?

"Product placement, or embedded marketing,is a form of advertisement, where branded goods or services are placed in a context usually devoid of ads, such as movies, the story line of television shows, or news programs." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Product_placement

Dayna:

I understand your point, and frankly, I agree with what you and Cady shared.

Since NASA and our almighty, infallable (infantile?), and flawless federal government cannot seem to do anything but bitch, scream, and languish while our society and science leadership prowess burns on the bier of entitlements, it seems to me you and Cady are DEMONSTRATING and PROMOTING in a POSITIVE manner, space exploration.

Stand your ground. Don't be part of the generation which burns our ships in the harbor of history.

Our civilization has repeatedly demonstrated, and will prove, again, free enterprise and entrepreneurism trumps government bureacracies and technocrats EVERY SINGLE TIME.

My best to you, Charles, and Cady. You are all setting an example I can follow, and a standard I can easily bear.

Editor's note: why was the post pulled offline?

It seems to me that you've got two fundamentally opposing belief systems represented here. One that is proudly saying individuals should build personal relationships because it gives them an advantage. The other that says that government resources aren't supposed to be used for private benefit. It is quite clear which side the law and traditional ethics support.

I am personally appalled when I read "All I did was get a shot of Charlie's new thriller, Specific Impulse, in the hands of an astronaut. On the International Space Station. With Discovery parked outside the window." Sure it's a PR coup. But the phrasing implies that this was accomplished by exploiting a personal relationship to get publicity that money literally could not buy. Far from praiseworthy, that's shameful.

There is no doubt that networking and making connections from nurtured relationships is a good practice in private industry. But when you work for the federal government and use government resources to do this, you are violating ethics rules of the Executive Branch. This is clearly the case here. This is a gross ethics violation. Anyone who doesn't see that and thinks this is OK is unethical. THAT'S the problem with America these days, a lack of ethics.

One of the reasons that NASA is so touchy regarding such things is the Apollo 15 stamp debacle, when the crew made a private deal with a seller in Germany (I think) to sell stamps cancelled in flight during their lunar trip, wherein the crew was to pocket some money from the deal.

I'm quite confident that Cady had no such inappropriate motives in mind and was just doing a nice thing for a friend: snapping a picture of the book (which she enjoyed) while on orbit. The exploitation of that picture as a PR item by someone else is where it seemingly crossed the line.

However, "the" line is getting more and more fuzzy given such means of communication as social media, etc., broadcasting an ocean of details about everyone's doings around the world (and beyond).

Must we keep astronauts immersed in bland generic-label-only goldfish bowls because they happen to be government employees working on government-furnished equipment? Heaven forbid that one of their Lands End crew shirt labels is actually spotted in a photograph...

Sooner or later, living in space is going to be just plain living...in space. Are particular soda brands excluded from Mission Control to ensure they don't appear on NASA TV? At some point, it truly becomes ridiculous to sweat such matters.

But, gee, how can I get a copy of MY book to the ISS?

I have to disagree with you on this one, Keith; Keith Vauquelin has it about right. And on the PR people seeming to claim this as a win? Keith! These are PR people! Remember? Spin? It's their JOB to spin stuff.

It's wrong to pull the post. Instead, any blog writer should just man-up and admit the error (as you have done here a few occasions). It is easy to see why the post was pulled, though; just too much hassle especially for Cady.