Home
Archive
Columnists
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Register to Vote: Rock the Vote, powered by Working Assets Wireless
Advertisement
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

How PR Ploys Fill the Pentagon's Recruiting Quotas

By Diane Farsetta, Center for Media and Democracy. Posted February 1, 2007.


The Pentagon relies on sophisticated PR strategies, suckering media to cover its gimmick events -- all in the name of boosting recruiting numbers.
Advertisement

Increasing "the ranks of our military" is "one of the first steps we can take together" to "position America to meet every challenge that confronts us," said President Bush in last week's State of the Union address. "Tonight I ask the Congress to authorize an increase in the size of our active Army and Marine Corps by 92,000 in the next five years."

The 92,000 figure was put forward by Defense Secretary Robert Gates, who told the Senate Armed Services Committee on January 12 that more troops are needed to boost "combat capability" and "strengthen our military for the long war against terrorism." The Pentagon plans to meet that goal by reenlisting former Marines and increasing the Army's recruitment and retention rates.

Under the plan, the Army would only "slightly increase its recruitment goals -- by 2,000 to 3,000" a year, according to UPI. But in 2005, "the Army failed to meet its annual recruiting goal by the widest margin in two decades," reported the New York Times. To meet its 2006 goal, the Army hired more recruiters, raised the maximum allowable age for recruits, doubled the percentage of recruits who scored low on aptitude tests, issued waivers for some recruits' prior convictions, and significantly increased cash bonuses.

If it was that difficult for the Army to meet past recruiting goals, how will it meet future, larger ones? Some clues are offered in the Army's self-nomination for a prestigious public relations award.

The Army submitted its "Birth of an Army, Birth of Freedom: The U.S. Army 225th Birthday Campaign" for consideration in the Public Relations Society of America's 2001 annual awards. (The Army won an award, but then so did the U.S. Northern Command in 2006, for "outstanding achievement in strategic public relations planning and implementation in response to Hurricane Katrina.")

The nomination documents provide a rare, detailed look at Army recruiting, including how the largest branch of the U.S. armed forces works with public relations firms and major media to meet recruiting goals. Moreover, they illustrate how a small campaign, by Pentagon standards -- the Army spent $370,000 and used its "in-house marketing team" -- can reach tens of millions of people, thanks in large part to uncritical support from broadcast outlets.

Ketchum as Catch Can

Following significant troop reductions throughout the 1990's, "the Army was becoming disconnected from the American people," explains the awards nomination. "Recruiting new soldiers had become increasingly more difficult, with the Army having not met its recruiting goals" for fiscal years 1997 through 1999. The Army's public affairs staff -- the government's preferred description for its PR people -- hoped that a concerted media campaign could "assist recruiting efforts by using the Army 225th Birthday as a mechanism for attracting potential recruits."

The Army drew on extensive research to develop the campaign, including a survey by a major and controversial PR firm. "In conjunction with the Army's Training With Industry program at Ketchum, an Army Public Affairs officer worked with Ketchum's research department to conduct attitudinal research about the Army," the awards nomination states. "The study was focused on regions of the United States without a large military presence."


Digg!

See more stories tagged with: public relations, pentagon, ketchum

Diane Farsetta is senior researcher at the Center for Media and Democracy.

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from Media and Technology! Sign up now »


Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
It's Really About Money and Bennies
Posted by: sofla100 on Feb 1, 2007 4:59 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Army recruiting now is relying heavily on sign-up bonuses. Up to $40K or so. Now, especially for a young 17-18 year old who only managed barely a high school diploma and has no money or opportunity for college, this is quite a lot of money. And, on top ot that, health care is provided along with the GI Bill. I will tell you, that is a heck of a lot better then Wal-Mart's on main street, even if you might have to go off to war. You might easily figure, take the cash and bennies and take your chances for a couple years. The Army needs to contend somehow with a very unpopular war now when it fills its ranks. The PR campaigns and advertising I think are really secondary to what money and incentives will buy. I guess it is the perfect solution in a capitalist society, if you spend enough, you will get it. And, that is the truth. Appeals to patriotism and the mentoring thing are really superficial compared to this. So, I think the real PR thing is more for the general American public, that it is things like patriotism or "becoming a man" or something like that, that the Army is really about and why people come in, when in reality, it is most often about money and benefits.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: It's Really About Money and Bennies Posted by: Conservasaurus
Words never spoken by a TV news producer
Posted by: VannaLaRoche on Feb 1, 2007 5:22 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
"Well, you see, sir, our news show, we try to cover news stories that are current and relevant, you see, and we feel that the story of the Army's birthday celebration should maybe go on a Sunday feature or mid-weekday news program instead of prime-time breaking news . . . "

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

So many straight lines, so little time
Posted by: Chickensh*tEagle on Feb 1, 2007 6:56 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
--and an equal number realize that technology developed by the Army has beneficial civilian applications.

Like non-lethal heat rays -- great for ragheads and peaceniks.

-- "the secretary of the Army, sergeant major of the Army and soldiers dressed in period uniforms rang the opening bell" of the New York Stock Exchange."

With a "War is good for business, invest your sons" banner, right?

"--with a "late surge" of interest among 22-year-old Hispanic and African-American youth.

...After a few years of dead-end McJobs, sure!

--The "history site" described "contributions the Army has made to our nation."

Like...clearing out pesky Native Americans?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» good reply Posted by: WhatNow?
Lets help enlistments. Get Patriotic!
Posted by: LeftCoastProgressive on Feb 1, 2007 8:32 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The Army and Marines need your your slogans to help enlistments. Here ar a few starters. Make a
a contribution in the fight against "terrorism".

"War is good for business, invest your sons"

"Be a part of the surge, guys are dying to get in the Army"

"Contributions the Army has made to our nation: indian-free great plains"

"Tired of thinking? Join the Army!

"No more job hoppin'. Just raghead-poppin! Join the Army!"

"Become a man! Join the Marines! Learn to kill!

Extensive weapons training! Load a 50 Caliber machine gun. You'll know what to do. Join the Army.

"There is nothing like the smell of cordite and blood in the morning. Join the Army!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

This article explains a lot...
Posted by: thoughtcriminal on Feb 1, 2007 11:26 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I was wondering why the FBI was so feverish about 'eco-terrorism' over the past few years - the link to Ketchum at Sourcewatch explains a lot:

In 1991 a leaked memo from Ketchum, hired by the Clorox Corporation to develop a crisis management plan, detailed proposed responses to a number of hypothetical scenarios, including a peaceful protest by Greenpeace at a Clorox factory. Among the recommended tactics was the launch of a "Stop Environmental Terrorism" public relations campaign.

Take out the "Environmental" and you got the real basis of the military recruiting program: "Stop Terrorism".

Let's see...terrorism: deliberate attacks on civilians designed to produce a change in the political situation. Apparently, if the terrorists are wearing uniforms identifying them as members of a country's military force, it's not terrorism - or is it?

I still can't figure out the difference between a military assault and a terrorist assault... but let's see - what is the US counterinsurgency program in Iraq up to right now? State-sponsored terrorism designed by General Petraeus, John Negroponte, the CIA and friends seems to be the favorite tactic. If you hire Saddam's old thugs (the "Wolf Brigade") to do the terrorizing, who's responsible?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Nazi Infiltration and Infestation in the military.
Posted by: AlexSantos on Feb 1, 2007 1:49 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Fresh recruits eager to join.

Serpent's egg

nazis-and-military

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]