|
robertross
|
|
« Reply #3300 on: 05/09/2009 04:04 PM » |
|
Sorry not sure what your IOC acronym stands for
"Initial Operational Capability"  ?
Thanks for the reply!
Duane
Yup.
|
|
|
|
mars.is.wet
|
|
« Reply #3301 on: 05/09/2009 04:10 PM » |
|
Get people from the EELV camp and maybe ATK to support each other. Show the panel with Direct and EELV, the US is better than 1 or another alone. Show them how Direct can support the ISS and moon, since it looking like ISS will be around till at least 2020. Weave a story of Direct support Brack's Space policy, doing a moon flyby and maybe landing cargo BEFORE he leaves office. In the story, talk about EELV's flying to the station dealing crew and Direct deliving a new module. You need to capture their attention and interest in the first 5 minutes!
See, that's even a different strategy (or maybe I missed the point). Will your presentation to the panel be all things to all people? Will you include things like EELV (which you obviously know something but less about in terms of cost)? Will you show lots of stuff and options (risking complexity and the scoff of being unbelievable) or will you go "simple" and let them find the beauty for themselves? Having given many briefings to many decision makers, this is not a trivial task. Selecting the story is critical. And I don't mean promising the most, I mean the one that allows them to buy into your tale with a minimum of buy in or belief required. They will be skeptical by nature, and the obvious to you will not necessarily be obvious to them if it is in a complex and far reaching wrapper.
|
|
|
|
|
|
ballew
|
|
« Reply #3303 on: 05/09/2009 05:28 PM » |
|
Now that the Direct proposal is being recognized as a viable alternative worthy of being included in the HSF Review, I think now is the time, more than ever, that Direct needs a major publicity push to coincide with their upcoming ISDC presentation.
If 60 Minutes or one (or more) of the talking heads on Fox or CNN (i.e. Neil Cavuto, Glen Beck, Bill O'Rielly, Sean Hannity, Brett Baier, Anderson Cooper, Larry King, Campbell Brown, etc.) could be persuaded to take an interest and airing a 5 minute segment highlighting the advantages of a Direct/EELV program vs Ares, I think that would create a story-line that attract further media attention from the other networks and publications as well as the politicians.
However, I think in order for this to occur Direct needs two things
1. A credible public figure with name recognition such as a former astronaut, a former or current politician and/or a recognizable business leader to appear on one or more of these shows. Does the Direct team have the support of any such individual(s) who would volunteer their time and energy and be willing to provide public support? Don’t get me wrong, the Direct team (public and private members) have done a phenomenal job, but politics and the media usually don’t care about the people who do the hard work that creates and drives a movement like Direct.
2. One or more of the major contractors will need to provide behind the scenes support and confirmation to the networks, politicians and their other media contacts that the Direct proposal is feasible and preferable.
|
|
|
|
MKremer
|
|
« Reply #3304 on: 05/09/2009 06:51 PM » |
|
If 60 Minutes or one (or more) of the talking heads on Fox or CNN (i.e. Neil Cavuto, Glen Beck, Bill O'Rielly, Sean Hannity, Brett Baier, Anderson Cooper, Larry King, Campbell Brown, etc.) could be persuaded to take an interest and airing a 5 minute segment highlighting the advantages of a Direct/EELV program vs Ares, I think that would create a story-line that attract further media attention from the other networks and publications as well as the politicians.
The "talking heads" aren't the ones most important to any "news" program - it's one of the producers or the executive producer. They're the ones who 'create' a story or program segment, assign the people needed to make it happen, and are in control of most of the final written copy read on the air. The "talking heads" are, in reality, actually not much more than just talking heads reading whatever text appears on top of the camera's telepromptr.
|
|
|
|
spacecase
|
|
« Reply #3305 on: 05/09/2009 06:55 PM » |
|
Now that the Direct proposal is being recognized as a viable alternative worthy of being included in the HSF Review, I think now is the time, more than ever, that Direct needs a major publicity push to coincide with their upcoming ISDC presentation.
If 60 Minutes or one (or more) of the talking heads on Fox or CNN (i.e. Neil Cavuto, Glen Beck, Bill O'Rielly, Sean Hannity, Brett Baier, Anderson Cooper, Larry King, Campbell Brown, etc.) could be persuaded to take an interest and airing a 5 minute segment highlighting the advantages of a Direct/EELV program vs Ares, I think that would create a story-line that attract further media attention from the other networks and publications as well as the politicians.
However, I think in order for this to occur Direct needs two things
1. A credible public figure with name recognition such as a former astronaut, a former or current politician and/or a recognizable business leader to appear on one or more of these shows. Does the Direct team have the support of any such individual(s) who would volunteer their time and energy and be willing to provide public support? Don’t get me wrong, the Direct team (public and private members) have done a phenomenal job, but politics and the media usually don’t care about the people who do the hard work that creates and drives a movement like Direct.
2. One or more of the major contractors will need to provide behind the scenes support and confirmation to the networks, politicians and their other media contacts that the Direct proposal is feasible and preferable.
And your web site needs to be updated with the most current information in a simple and engaging format, with links to pages with more detailed information or public documents that support your stand. The more correct information the panel can know about Direct before the presentation, the better.
|
|
|
|
nooneofconsequence
|
|
« Reply #3306 on: 05/09/2009 07:43 PM » |
|
While this is not a policy review, its important to realize that those that will be examining the review will do so looking for policy direction (change). That will be how they rationalize going forward.
ESAS gave a way to move forward - but we didn't get there as planned. Rather than becoming caught in a cloud of incomprehensible issues, one boils the ocean down to a short list that's obvious.
Then you tell the story, issue by issue, blow by blow, everytime relating why X thing happened by going back to the short list - a mantra.
Then you tell the new story, item by item, again going back to the short list given your interpretation *KEEPING TO THAT WITHOUT BEING INTERRUPTED OR REINTERPRETED*. It is always only *one thing*.
You close with going back to the short list. Whenever they see you, they/you repeat the short list. That's what goes through the process.
A form of "confront, deny, displace".
|
|
|
|
NUAETIUS
|
|
« Reply #3307 on: 05/09/2009 08:01 PM » |
|
What would you all think of an official press conference where we invite people to come and ask questions?
Ross.
I think a news conference would be a bad idea. No matter what, your "press conference" would not even hold a candle to a NASA or Industry presser. You in the end would come off rightfully amateurish. I think the better idea is to make a quick document that lays out all sides of this issue. The pros and cons of all the ideas, EELV, Ares, and Direct. Include all the links that you know of where a reporter could get good, unbiased information. I am sure with the announcement of the Blue Ribbon panel there are reporters all across the world trying to see if they can make a story out of this. The 1st place they will go is NASA.gov, and they will see their numbers as unquestionable. You need to combat this by feeding them what they need for the story that is less bias. Things that all reporters would love to have, that you probably have links to. -HD quality video of Ares I & V, EELV carrying Orion, and the Jupiter Family. -Technical information on all the competing interests in the Panel. -A well produced "Commercial", again in HD quality, that lays out the case for Direct. Would need to be no longer than 5 minutes. -A page with links to all the reports that the panel is likely to reference, going all the way back. Direct needs to make itself TV friendly, that means a comprehensive article that is easy to quote needs to be written, they need HD animations to play in the background while they talk, and they need quotes from people that the public might recognize. The last thing that is going to change public opinion is a press conference. As was said earlier, are there any former administrators, or astronauts that support the idea of Direct over Ares? Direct seems more friendly to Buzz Aldrin's cycler idea, maybe you could get a quote from him supporting direct. The story line for a major news outlet would be easy, yet another failed Bush era program.
|
|
|
|
HIP2BSQRE
|
|
« Reply #3308 on: 05/09/2009 08:07 PM » |
|
mars,
Actually everyone,
What would you all think of an official press conference where we invite people to come and ask questions?
Perhaps even including some questions which people can e-mail in ahead of time?
I know we've covered all of this ground many times here on these threads, but I wonder what interest there might be to understand more about DIRECT by more people 'out there'?
Ross.
I think that if you had done it a year ago, no "serious" press would have showed up. But now, with the review in the works and a blue ribbon panel being convened, I think you would draw quite a crowd. I think everyone wants to know what precipitated this review, and what may possibly come out of it.
Of course, DIRECT cannot take full credit for the review. You couldn't have done it without Ares!
A news conference and Q&A session would also address an earlier post of mine, where I asked you to get proactive instead of reactive. Get your message out to the people who are not industry insiders, get ahead of the curve, and let NASA be the ones left reacting to your moves, not the other way around.
Mark S.
I
I agree totally with you---Direct needs to be more proactive. Direct will not win being reactive and being on the defensive.
|
|
|
|
gladiator1332
|
|
« Reply #3309 on: 05/09/2009 08:09 PM » |
|
I agree. We need a "Direct for Dummies"...the documents available right now are great engineering documents, but the "real world" can't comprehend that stuff.
I always felt the Jupiter Evolution animation conveyed the Shuttle-Direct relationship better in 2 minutes than a 100 page document could.
When Honda wants to sell a car, they don't give you a 200 page manual explaining why it is better than Toyota, they give you a 60 second commercial that shows you why it is better.
|
|
|
|
HIP2BSQRE
|
|
« Reply #3310 on: 05/09/2009 08:18 PM » |
|
What would you all think of an official press conference where we invite people to come and ask questions?
Ross.
I think a news conference would be a bad idea. No matter what, your "press conference" would not even hold a candle to a NASA or Industry presser. You in the end would come off rightfully amateurish.
I think the better idea is to make a quick document that lays out all sides of this issue. The pros and cons of all the ideas, EELV, Ares, and Direct. Include all the links that you know of where a reporter could get good, unbiased information.
I am sure with the announcement of the Blue Ribbon panel there are reporters all across the world trying to see if they can make a story out of this. The 1st place they will go is NASA.gov, and they will see their numbers as unquestionable. You need to combat this by feeding them what they need for the story that is less bias.
Things that all reporters would love to have, that you probably have links to.
-HD quality video of Ares I & V, EELV carrying Orion, and the Jupiter Family.
-Technical information on all the competing interests in the Panel.
-A well produced "Commercial", again in HD quality, that lays out the case for Direct. Would need to be no longer than 5 minutes.
-A page with links to all the reports that the panel is likely to reference, going all the way back.
Direct needs to make itself TV friendly, that means a comprehensive article that is easy to quote needs to be written, they need HD animations to play in the background while they talk, and they need quotes from people that the public might recognize. The last thing that is going to change public opinion is a press conference.
As was said earlier, are there any former administrators, or astronauts that support the idea of Direct over Ares? Direct seems more friendly to Buzz Aldrin's cycler idea, maybe you could get a quote from him supporting direct.
The story line for a major news outlet would be easy, yet another failed Bush era program.
Remember the baseball cards that were done last summer--they were simple and Direct. :-0 Do a mailing campaign to all the big networks. Have a 5 page summary, and the most currant animation showing the Direct. :-)
|
|
|
|
NUAETIUS
|
|
« Reply #3311 on: 05/09/2009 08:33 PM » |
|
Remember the baseball cards that were done last summer--they were simple and Direct. :-0 Do a mailing campaign to all the big networks. Have a 5 page summary, and the most currant animation showing the Direct. :-)
The baseball cards are neat, but they are more of a fan product than something that would turn heads. Mailing summaries is a bad idea because these networks aren't waiting around to get summaries, if they want it they will to to direct launcher.com and get it. If Direct 3.0 is ready, I would not wait till the end of the month to publish it. The news stories that will determine the fate of NASA are being written now. Also the staffers that will do the leg work of the Panel are doing their background reading now. Do you really want Direct 2.0 to be where all the questions you will be asked come from?
|
|
|
|
ballew
|
|
« Reply #3312 on: 05/09/2009 08:34 PM » |
|
mars,
Actually everyone,
What would you all think of an official press conference where we invite people to come and ask questions?
Perhaps even including some questions which people can e-mail in ahead of time?
I know we've covered all of this ground many times here on these threads, but I wonder what interest there might be to understand more about DIRECT by more people 'out there'?
Ross.
I think that the only time/place that would be appropriate/beneficial for a press conference would be after your presentation at the ISDC at a nearby hotel conference room. Of course, I don't know how difficult that would be to arrange but you would already have interested people and media representatives there. Provide some background information on how the Direct program would affect the local jobs and the local economy to the local press before the press conference and you could get positive local press coverage that could influence Florida voters to convince their Congressmen and Senators to support Direct. Actually, I think you should start sending out regular press releases and/or short white papers to local media (newspapers, TV, radio, politicians, local bloggers) discussing the economic ramifications of Direct vs Ares on the local Florida economy now rather than later. It would give them a chance to run a story on a slow news day or use it for background material on related story.
|
|
|
|
mars.is.wet
|
|
« Reply #3313 on: 05/09/2009 08:34 PM » |
|
It has nothing to do with networks. I think these suggestions are misguided.
It has everything to do with the 1 hour you will have in front of the panel so that they will include you in their list of options to be analyzed. Then you need to have unassailably simple documentation behind it that they can compare to their own. It needs to include tech, BoEs, a WBS, a schedule and everything that a proposal (you have done a proposal, right?) would have.
The presentation needs to be the pointer that leads them to the facts. At this time, the media will only serve to "turn off" the engineers in the group and dismiss it as hype, IMO.
|
|
|
|
ballew
|
|
« Reply #3314 on: 05/09/2009 08:39 PM » |
|
Also the staffers that will do the leg work of the Panel are doing their background reading now. Do you really want Direct 2.0 to be where all the questions you will be asked come from?
I agree that if you can identify the staffers who will be objective, they need the appropriate materials as soon as possible. Has anybody seen a date published of when the HSF Review panel will start meeting to organize the review?
|
|
|
|
