Showing posts with label NASA. Show all posts
Showing posts with label NASA. Show all posts

Monday, July 20, 2009

A Message to Reach the Stars

Communicating Our Way to Space
Forty years ago today. I can remember that evening so clearly, sitting at the edge of my parent's bed to get the best view of the TV as Neil Armstrong descended the ladder of the Lunar Excursion Module. Then, with Walter Cronkite's narration, we all witnessed the triumph of the first step on the moon. No VCRs or DVRs, kids. My father put his Bolex camera on a tripod and took 16mm movies of the television tube.

I'm sorry that Cronkite won't see this or any other anniversary of the moon landing. The legendary/iconic/most trusted/uncle-to-all news man will be missed. For other fans of the space program, when it comes to walking on the surface of other worlds, all we'll have is anniversaries for a while.

For the surviving septa and octogenarians who were part of those groundbreaking Mercury, Gemini and Apollo missions, this is another milestone to lament the long absence of people breaking away from earth orbit. There have been some tremendous milestones in space, of course -- weather and communications satellites, the International Space Station, space telescopes and other astronomical instruments, deep space probes, the Martian rovers. But robotic tracks on Mars are no substitute for human footprints.

What first put us into space, however, was far from these lofty visions. It was the Cold War and the strategic "missile gap" with the USSR. In an opinion piece in Saturday's The New York Times (One Giant Leap to Nowhere), Tom Wolfe wrote that we were successful in winning the space race because we had a clear purpose, a clear rallying cry, a clear message.

He may have a point. We've gone from regaining a military advantage and saving the "American way of life" to... what exactly? We've heard a number messages from NASA, its contractors, space enthusiasts and Congress, including: we need to ensure our global competitiveness, we must continue to map and explore the heavens, some science can be conducted only outside of our atmosphere, it's a moral imperative for the U.S to lead in space, it will sustain thousands of skilled jobs, it will spawn new businesses and products, we need new inspiration to drive us forward and revive our spirit.

Wolfe said that "What NASA needs is the power of the Word" and a "philosopher" to help articulate the rationale for an ongoing commitment to space. The one and only, he said, was Werner von Braun but "NASA couldn’t present as its spokesman and great philosopher a former high-ranking member of the Nazi Wehrmacht with a heavy German accent." The message von Braun wanted to convey was that we need to find a way to get off the planet -- all of us. He knew that, in its death throws (a few billion years from now), our star will expand and envelope Earth. We would have to get away one day, and not just to potentially habitable Mars. We would have to leave the solar system.

The survival of humanity. This is clearly the most important message one could ever hear but also the least urgent. Maybe in the year 100,002,009 Congress will start appropriating some funds with a few hundred million years to spare! Of course, we might want to act faster. Von Braun, as far as I know, didn't mention the possibility of nuclear war, a collision with an asteroid or comet, or the impact of unchecked climate change.

We need more than messages, of course. Any communicator knows that a message requires proof points -- evidence to support the statement. They must have relevance and be compelling, and instill support if not positive action. They must be coherent, and in a language the public and other stakeholders can understand. And, they must have immediacy. The question of why now must be answered.

Whatever the message and whoever the spokesperson, I hope we get back on a trajectory to the stars.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Between blog posts, you can follow me on Twitter.

Wednesday, March 25, 2009

Out of This World PR

This article also appears in odwyerpr.com.

How a Comedian Outwitted Some Rocket Scientists
I have been fascinated by our space program for as long as I can remember. Indeed, one of my earliest memories was watching John Glenn lift off in Friendship 7 in 1962 and seeing my mother cry. She said she didn't know if he would make it back.

Yes, spaceflight is serious business. But Stephen Colbert, the outstanding political satirist of Comedy Central, knows how to send us over the moon at NASA's expense.

You may have heard that NASA launched an on-line contest to help name a new module (now referred to as Node 3) for the International Space Station (ISS). Hoping to follow the tradition of naming past modules with lofty, cosmic names (Node 1 was named Unity, Node 2 was named Harmony), NASA opened up voting with Earthwise, Legacy, Serenity and Venture. They also allowed write-in votes.

Here's where Mr. Colbert comes in. This man is the Donald Trump of comedy. He has already managed to get a new species of spider named after him (Aptostichus stephencolberti) and a flavor of Ben and Jerry's ice cream (Stephen Colbert's AmeriCone Dream). In 2006, he asked viewers of his show to submit his name to Hungary's Ministry of Transport for their on-line effort to name a new bridge over the Danube River. It was reported that Colbert won the first round of voting with over 17 million votes. I should note that the population of Hungary is about 9.9 million. The Ministry then changed the rules.

For the NASA contest, a total of 1,190,437 votes were cast. Colbert scored 230,539 votes, outscoring Serenity by more than 40,000 votes. So, what does NASA do? Well, according to Space.com, agency personnel are floating the idea of naming the Station's new toilet in the module "Colbert." This is proof that NASA should stick to space and aeronautics and not venture into comedy. A Colbert space toilet isn't funny - I think it's demeaning.

Although the rules of the contest state that "the results are not binding on NASA" and "NASA reserves the right to modify these Contest Rules at any time," what happened to fair and square? But being an optimist, I'm wondering if there's a win-win in this somewhere.

NASA has abbreviations and acronyms for everything, so why not now? Here's my idea: For Stephen T. Colbert, let's come up with something space-like using his initials. Node 3 could become the STC - Serenity Transorbital Compartment. Or something like that. NASA gets to use the Serenity name and Colbert gets his initials immortalized (at least until the ISS burns up in the atmosphere after its service life is over).

NASA could embrace this situation. Why not invite Colbert to tour the STC mock-up or to the actual launch at the Cape? Why not have him on a video link with the orbiting crew during the taping of his show? Sure, he'll make fun and get some laughs but these would be sure fire ways for the agency to make science more accessible and gain a huge audience.

So, I've done my part to help solve this planetary crisis. Now it's time for NASA to learn a few communication tips:
  • Don't ask for something that you don't want to hear.
  • Changing the rules makes one look like a sore loser.
  • In the age of on-line vote stuffing, enforce the one person, one vote rule.
  • Plan strategically, and think through the intended and unintended consequences of any action.
  • Play to your strengths - science not satire.