Johnny Coli Posted February 17, 2006 Share Posted February 17, 2006 One popular notion about the Bush administration is that they’re doing a good job in running the country (I disagree, but that’s a topic for another set of threads), but they get failing marks for “getting their message out.” Wall Street Journal "The White House has really done a poor job of getting the message out, which is why we've had to step into the breach," says California-based Republican political strategist Sal Russo, one of [Move America Forward's] three founders. "They should do a better job of coordinating with those willing to get out and tell the story. We shouldn't be the only ones out here fighting." Members of the administration recently eluded to as much during Dubya's set of “candid” speeches this past December (Fox News). The administration has long complained that the media often ignores positive developments in the country. In the last two weeks, the president has given four major speeches on Iraq — relating to security, economy and democracy — but getting the message out has not been easy, with the speeches airing during the day mostly on cable networks. However, a new GAO report came out Monday showing that not only can’t they get the word out themselves, they’ve paid a lot of money to public relations and advertising firms over the past few years that aren’t getting the job done either. Report: Bush Spent $1.4 Billion on ‘Spin’ The Bush administration spent $1.4 billion in taxpayer dollars on 137 contracts with advertising agencies over the past two-and-a-half years, according to a Government Accountability Office report released by House Democrats Monday.[…] Trends in spending on PR and ad contracts were not documented, but a prior study by the minority staff of the Government Reform Committee found that spending on public relations contracts rose rapidly under the Bush administration. That report found that spending on contracts with public relations firms had increased to $88 million in 2004 from $39 million in 2000, an increase of 128%. Here is a link to the report and a section of the abstract: GAO-06-305 abstract The departments reported a total of 343 media contracts, for which they incurred obligations of $1.62 billion during the period of GAO's review [fiscal year 2003 through the second quarter of fiscal year 2005]. Specifically, the departments reported 137 contracts (40 percent of the total contracts) with advertising agencies, 131 contracts (38 percent) with media organizations, 54 contracts (16 percent) with public relations firms, and 8 contracts (2 percent) with individual members of the media. For 13 contracts (4 percent), departments did not report on type of media firm. The departments incurred obligations of $1.4 billion with advertising agencies (87 percent of the obligations), $197 million with public relations firms (12 percent), $15 million (1 percent) with media organizations, and $90,000 (less than 1 percent) with individual members of the media. Link to a one page pdf of the report highlights Link to the whole report There was $1.1 billion dollars worth of media contracts spent by the DoD over a two year period. What if the Bush administration had taken out a $1 million dollar ad during the Superbowl? People would be outraged at the absurd use of their tax dollars. But they spent $1.6 billion. One-point-six billion dollars in PR. And they’re having a hard time getting their message out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Avenger Posted February 17, 2006 Share Posted February 17, 2006 One-point-six billion dollars in PR. And they’re having a hard time getting their message out. 605742[/snapback] $1.6 billion is peanuts - come on, man! The White House just asked for $72.4 billion for continuing operations in Iraq and Afganistan. This comes on top of the $50 billion already approved for 2006, and the adminsitration has already laid the groundwork for another $65 billion later this year. 1.6 billion is short money - just shy of the $1.9 billion requested to develop better methods to deal with IEDs, the leading killer of our troops in the battle zones. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alaska Darin Posted February 17, 2006 Share Posted February 17, 2006 It's really fun to watch liberals complain about the government wasting money. Oh, the irony. From an Email I got today (Content not completely verified): George Washington On April 30, 1789, George Washington, standing on the balcony of Federal Hall on Wall Street in New York, took his oath of office as the first President of the United States. "As the first of every thing, in our situation will serve to establish a Precedent," he wrote James Madison, "it is devoutly wished on my part, that these precedents may be fixed on true principles." Born in 1732 into a Virginia planter family, he learned the morals, manners, and body of knowledge requisite for an 18th century Virginia gentleman. He pursued two intertwined interests: military arts and western expansion. At 16 he helped survey Shenandoah lands for Thomas, Lord Fairfax. Commissioned a lieutenant colonel in 1754, he fought the first skirmishes of what grew into the French and Indian War. The next year, as an aide to Gen. Edward Braddock, he escaped injury although four bullets ripped his coat and two horses were shot from under him. From 1759 to the outbreak of the American Revolution, Washington managed his lands around Mount Vernon and served in the Virginia House of Burgesses. Married to a widow, Martha Dandridge Custis, he devoted himself to a busy and happy life. But like his fellow planters, Washington felt himself exploited by British merchants and hampered by British regulations. As the quarrel with the mother country grew acute, he moderately but firmly voiced his resistance to the restrictions. When the Second Continental Congress assembled in Philadelphia in May 1775, Washington, one of the Virginia delegates, was elected Commander in Chief of the Continental Army. On July 3, 1775, at Cambridge, Massachusetts, he took command of his ill-trained troops and embarked upon a war that was to last six grueling years. He realized early that the best strategy was to harass the British. He reported to Congress, "we should on all Occasions avoid a general Action, or put anything to the Risque, unless compelled by a necessity, into which we ought never to be drawn." Ensuing battles saw him fall back slowly, then strike unexpectedly. Finally in 1781 with the aid of French allies--he forced the surrender of Cornwallis at Yorktown. Washington longed to retire to his fields at Mount Vernon. But he soon realized that the Nation under its Articles of Confederation was not functioning well, so he became a prime mover in the steps leading to the Constitutional Convention at Philadelphia in 1787. When the new Constitution was ratified, the Electoral College unanimously elected Washington President He did not infringe upon the policy making powers that he felt the Constitution gave Congress. But the determination of foreign policy became preponderantly a Presidential concern. When the French Revolution led to a major war between France and England, Washington refused to accept entirely the recommendations of either his Secretary of State Thomas Jefferson, who was pro-French, or his Secretary of the Treasury Alexander Hamilton, who was pro-British. Rather, he insisted upon a neutral course until the United States could grow stronger. To his disappointment, two parties were developing by the end of his first term. Wearied of politics, feeling old, he retired at the end of his second. In his Farewell Address, he urged his countrymen to forswear excessive party spirit and geographical distinctions. "It serves to distract the Public Councils, and enfeeble the Public Administration....agitates the Community with ill-founded jealousies and false alarms; kindles the animosity of one....against another....it opens the door to foreign influence and corruption...thus the policy and the will of one country are subjected to the policy and will of another." In foreign affairs, he warned against long-term alliances : "It is our true policy to steer clear of permanent alliances with any portion of the foreign world..." Washington enjoyed less than three years of retirement at Mount Vernon, for he died of a throat infection December 14, 1799. For months the Nation mourned him. My typical rant: It's too bad all of you "really smart" partisan apologists haven't evolved as much as a man who died over 200 years ago - or learned from him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ghost of BiB Posted February 17, 2006 Share Posted February 17, 2006 There was $1.1 billion dollars worth of media contracts spent by the DoD over a two year period. I didn't see in your thing where it went (maybe I didn't look hard enough). Think it went into recruiting advertising? I can't think of anyone else Gov wise who actually has to advertise, buy airtime and stuff. They pretty well have to do prime time, too. That's a lot of dough. Wonder, as a comparison what another big company - like Bud or Ford spends in a year? Guess I'm wondering if this is strictly to the agencies, or includes the funds that actually go towards advertising space, whether it be on TV, or print, or on the side of a stock car. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pdh1 Posted February 17, 2006 Share Posted February 17, 2006 Speaking of not getting your message out, what the hell is this sign trying to say? http://images.ibsys.com/2006/0217/7154725_320X240.jpg Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Johnny Coli Posted February 17, 2006 Author Share Posted February 17, 2006 I didn't see in your thing where it went (maybe I didn't look hard enough). Think it went into recruiting advertising? I can't think of anyone else Gov wise who actually has to advertise, buy airtime and stuff. They pretty well have to do prime time, too. That's a lot of dough. Wonder, as a comparison what another big company - like Bud or Ford spends in a year? Guess I'm wondering if this is strictly to the agencies, or includes the funds that actually go towards advertising space, whether it be on TV, or print, or on the side of a stock car. 605809[/snapback] Follow the link to the whole report (pdf file). The DoD stuff starts on page 23 (page 28 of the pdf file). The whole report is 160 pages. It's all itemized, and there's some pretty funny stuff. Air Force $16,000 for "Stars and Strikes" bowling promotion $15,000 for embroidered golf towels The Army spent $2.5 million getting out their Global War on Terror message (ie, message development and responding to issues raised by stakeholders and influencers...what's that all about?). The Marines spent $133 million on recruiting advertizing. It itemizes by contract with the specific ad agencies, so you can have multiple contracts for the same thing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
erynthered Posted February 17, 2006 Share Posted February 17, 2006 Follow the link to the whole report (pdf file). The DoD stuff starts on page 23 (page 28 of the pdf file). The whole report is 160 pages. It's all itemized, and there's some pretty funny stuff. Air Force $16,000 for "Stars and Strikes" bowling promotion $15,000 for embroidered golf towels The Army spent $2.5 million getting out their Global War on Terror message (ie, message development and responding to issues raised by stakeholders and influencers...what's that all about?). The Marines spent $133 million on recruiting advertizing. It itemizes by contract with the specific ad agencies, so you can have multiple contracts for the same thing. 605851[/snapback] I'm not defending this by any means, but do you honestly think this is the only time that this has happened? Isn't the problem Government itself, not a party? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ghost of BiB Posted February 17, 2006 Share Posted February 17, 2006 Follow the link to the whole report (pdf file). The DoD stuff starts on page 23 (page 28 of the pdf file). The whole report is 160 pages. It's all itemized, and there's some pretty funny stuff. Air Force $16,000 for "Stars and Strikes" bowling promotion $15,000 for embroidered golf towels The Army spent $2.5 million getting out their Global War on Terror message (ie, message development and responding to issues raised by stakeholders and influencers...what's that all about?). The Marines spent $133 million on recruiting advertizing. It itemizes by contract with the specific ad agencies, so you can have multiple contracts for the same thing. 605851[/snapback] Yeah, I've since found it and then had to go back to work for awhile. Lots of nickle and dime for the Air Force (I'm guessing they account differently?), but the bulk is indeed in recruiting. This got me to thinking about it, even in terms of IT - there are a lot of web sites out there that are basically PR either for the outside world, or within a command, or a base or whatever for themselves. I wonder if they count against operating funds or they count against PR funds? They seem to cost quite a bit to set up and maintain. But, with the recruiting and promotion the DOD has to do, a billion plus from 03-05 doesn't surprise me as much as it first did. That is, as long as some of those millions actually go towards purchasing the air time and what not. Looking at the numbers, I'd guess it would have to. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Johnny Coli Posted February 17, 2006 Author Share Posted February 17, 2006 Yeah, I've since found it and then had to go back to work for awhile. Lots of nickle and dime for the Air Force (I'm guessing they account differently?), but the bulk is indeed in recruiting. This got me to thinking about it, even in terms of IT - there are a lot of web sites out there that are basically PR either for the outside world, or within a command, or a base or whatever for themselves. I wonder if they count against operating funds or they count against PR funds? They seem to cost quite a bit to set up and maintain. But, with the recruiting and promotion the DOD has to do, a billion plus from 03-05 doesn't surprise me as much as it first did. That is, as long as some of those millions actually go towards purchasing the air time and what not. Looking at the numbers, I'd guess it would have to. 605870[/snapback] The recruiting budget makes sense, and I'm sure there always has been one, and I'm pretty sure they need to spend a lot of money nowadays because going into the military right now doesn't look like such a swell idea for high school kids. But why does the Secretary of Defense need to hire a PR firm ($1.3 milion) for "branding development"? Is that how much a catching saying like "Operation Avenging Eagle" costs? They can't find someone to come up with these groovy names for a lot less money? I'd do it, but Rumsfeld just bugs the hell out of me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chef Jim Posted February 17, 2006 Share Posted February 17, 2006 The next year, as an aide to Gen. Edward Braddock, he escaped injury although four bullets ripped his coat and two horses were shot from under him. 605788[/snapback] Damn, that Chaney dude get's around. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Johnny Coli Posted February 17, 2006 Author Share Posted February 17, 2006 UPDATE: Rummy admits the terrorists are better at PR than the high-priced Manhattan crackpot firms he hired. The terrorists of today are the marketing hotshots of tomorrow "Our enemies have skillfully adapted to fighting wars in today's media age, but for the most part we -- our country, our government -- has not adapted," he said. Maybe he should hire their PR firm. "We in the government have barely even begun to compete in reaching their audiences," Rumsfeld said. Can we get our money back? He has also complained that the U.S. media tends to focus too much on the negative aspects of U.S. involvement in Iraq. So I take it "Operation We Don't Know what the Hell We're Doing" didn't inspire the target audience. Did you focus-test that one? "In some cases, military public affairs officials have had little communications training and little, if any, grounding in the importance of timing and rapid response, and the realities of digital and broadcast media," he said. I've got a seven-year-old neice that's gotten pretty good on the computer. "This is an unacceptable, dangerous deficiency," he said. That you just paid $1.6 billion dollars for. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alaska Darin Posted February 17, 2006 Share Posted February 17, 2006 UPDATE:Rummy admits the terrorists are better at PR than the high-priced Manhattan crackpot firms he hired. The terrorists of today are the marketing hotshots of tomorrow Maybe he should hire their PR firm. Can we get our money back? So I take it "Operation We Don't Know what the Hell We're Doing" didn't inspire the target audience. Did you focus-test that one? I've got a seven-year-old neice that's gotten pretty good on the computer. That you just paid $1.6 billion dollars for. 605926[/snapback] Can't wait until your guys are in charge again, just so I can see you try and defend their ridiculousness with gems like "if it feeds one child, I don't care if it costs $1.6 billion." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Johnny Coli Posted February 17, 2006 Author Share Posted February 17, 2006 Can't wait until your guys are in charge again, just so I can see you try and defend their ridiculousness with gems like "if it feeds one child, I don't care if it costs $1.6 billion." 605927[/snapback] Says the guy whose wing of the military spent $50, 000 on golf towels with the Air Force logo on them. Do you even golf? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alaska Darin Posted February 17, 2006 Share Posted February 17, 2006 Says the guy whose wing of the military spent $50, 000 on golf towels with the Air Force logo on them. Do you even golf? 605931[/snapback] Nope. Chalk that one up to the lengthy list of reasons why I'm a civilian. No money to train my guys but plenty to waste on that kind of crap. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Johnny Coli Posted February 17, 2006 Author Share Posted February 17, 2006 Nope. Chalk that one up to the lengthy list of reasons why I'm a civilian. No money to train my guys but plenty to waste on that kind of crap. 605935[/snapback] If they advertised all the golfing and bowling you guys do, they wouldn't have a recruiting problem. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SilverNRed Posted February 17, 2006 Share Posted February 17, 2006 UPDATE:Rummy admits the terrorists are better at PR than the high-priced Manhattan crackpot firms he hired. The terrorists of today are the marketing hotshots of tomorrow Maybe he should hire their PR firm. 605926[/snapback] The New York Times? CNN? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alaska Darin Posted February 17, 2006 Share Posted February 17, 2006 If they advertised all the golfing and bowling you guys do, they wouldn't have a recruiting problem. 605938[/snapback] I doubt the Air Force has a recruiting problem - though you can leave me out of the "you guys" thing. You can count the number of times I bowled while in the AF on one hand and I golfed the same number of times as Hillary Clinton has been laid by a man since Vince Foster "killed" himself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ghost of BiB Posted February 17, 2006 Share Posted February 17, 2006 Says the guy whose wing of the military spent $50, 000 on golf towels with the Air Force logo on them. Do you even golf? 605931[/snapback] They were required for the Air Force's newest effort at Global Force Projection USAFCCV Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SilverNRed Posted February 17, 2006 Share Posted February 17, 2006 They were required for the Air Force's newest effort at Global Force Projection USAFCCV 605969[/snapback] Pretty sure we just deployed that carrier to the Phillipines. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ghost of BiB Posted February 17, 2006 Share Posted February 17, 2006 Pretty sure we just deployed that carrier to the Phillipines. 605978[/snapback] We did? Take a while to get there from Aruba. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts