New CAP Logo?

[O-Rex]

Has anyone noticed the new "triangle prop" logo on the Volunteer, the report to congress, and even the updated CAP credit card?

What's up with that??

[JC004]

again with the identity crisis...

[Pylon]

They just can't help themselves.  Honestly.

Somebody at NHQ clearly thought "Gee, eight logos and seals isn't enough to choose from.  We need to make yet another logo that we'll use inconsistently just to make our corporate identity even more fractured."   

It's way past being silly.  It's obnoxious and unprofessional now.

[RiverAux]

Agreed. 

[Hawk200]

They just can't help themselves.  Honestly.

Somebody at NHQ clearly thought "Gee, eight logos and seals isn't enough to choose from.  We need to make yet another logo that we'll use inconsistently just to make our corporate identity even more fractured."   

It's way past being silly.  It's obnoxious and unprofessional now.

Second.

[caprr275]

they came out with that logo for summer NB. at WNB they had just a red prop (on a lapel pin)

[davidsinn]

Does somebody have this logo? I couldn't find in on the report to congress.

[JohnKachenmeister]

They just can't help themselves.  Honestly.

Somebody at NHQ clearly thought "Gee, eight logos and seals isn't enough to choose from.  We need to make yet another logo that we'll use inconsistently just to make our corporate identity even more fractured."   

It's way past being silly.  It's obnoxious and unprofessional now.

And ugly.  Don't forget ugly.

[Pylon]

Does somebody have this logo? I couldn't find in on the report to congress.

Attached.

[NIN]

"I just got this thing, its called Photoshop, and its wicked awesome.. Let me show you!"

[Lloyd Bumanglag Capt,CAP]

What a piece of crap logo..........it's ugly...looks like a logo that would be placed on a Donald Duck Disney bowling shirt......

[♠SARKID♠]

JHC this is just getting ridiculous.  To use a modified quote of a well known WIWG member who was speaking on a different topic:  [The logo people] are like a puppy.  And the puppy is piddling on the kitchen floor.  And nobody has taken a rolled up newspaper and whapped it over the head yet.

[Rob Sherlin]

 Hmmmm! Seems like they're trying to stray from our military style logos to try and proove something for some reason (even the "Citizens" quote thing). Maybe it's for members who are "anti - military", which is strange considering we wear uniforms, and are an Air Force Auxiliary. In that case, those members should probably find another organization to volunteer for.....Don't know why they came out with this....I don't like the logo either!....Too commercial looking!

[Phil Hirons, Jr.]

JHC this is just getting ridiculous.  To use a modified quote of a well known WIWG member who was speaking on a different topic:  [The logo people] are like a puppy.  And the puppy is piddling on the kitchen floor.  And nobody has taken a rolled up newspaper and whapped it over the head yet.

"I just got this thing, its called Photoshop, and its wicked awesome.. Let me show you!"

Time saver. Hit the puppy with the EMPTY Photoshop box.

[JAFO78]

JHC this is just getting ridiculous.  To use a modified quote of a well known WIWG member who was speaking on a different topic:  [The logo people] are like a puppy.  And the puppy is piddling on the kitchen floor.  And nobody has taken a rolled up newspaper and whapped it over the head yet.

Just drop a nuke on them!!!. It will be years before the land could be used.

[BuckeyeDEJ]

Our seal, emblem and any other logos are (or should be) governed by regulation. Changes should be approved by the National Board, not executed by NHQ without oversight or adherence to regulations.

That said, everyone thinks they're a graphic designer. Or an art or music critic. But only some are truly designers, artists or musicians.

If you play the kazoo, you're not a musician. If you use an Etch-A-Sketch, you're not an artist. If you use Publisher, you're not a designer.

[JC004]

I'm with Pylon, but we're going to fix this when we take over NHQ on Monday.  Worry not.   

[wuzafuzz]

If this keeps up, before long we'll have enough logos to issue a unique one to each member.   

[swamprat86]

If you want to see if it is official just have a company make a patch out of it and if they get a C&D from National because Vanguard didn't make it, it's official 

[jimmydeanno]

This may sound odd, but what about the idea of branding each of CAPs missions differently, almost as separate entities in and of themselves?

So "Civil Air Patrol" would be the "Parent Corporation" much like Pepsi Co.  Under that umbrella they'd operate three identities; Aerospace Education, Emergency Services and Cadet Programs.  Each would have separate logos and marketing material, etc.  Much like Pepsi Co has their different Soda types.

[sparks]

This logo reminds me of "Buzz Light Year"! Next we'll have that cartoon character on a patch to accompany the "Goofy" ES patch. We don't need it or any more uniform changes.

[N Harmon]

This may sound odd, but what about the idea of branding each of CAPs missions differently, almost as separate entities in and of themselves?

I think it would dilute our identity.

[JC004]

I think it would dilute our identity.

BTDT.

[Rotorhead]

Has anyone noticed the new "triangle prop" logo on the Volunteer, the report to congress, and even the updated CAP credit card?

What's up with that??

It's been more than 15 minutes since the last one was designed.

Time for a new one.

[A.Member]

Has anyone noticed the new "triangle prop" logo on the Volunteer, the report to congress, and even the updated CAP credit card?

What's up with that??

I give up.  What els eshould we expect from the team that thinks it's OK to photoshop every other image they put to print. 

The tringle prop is horrible...as is it's use as the letter "O".

Surely someone here must know who's running the show done there.  If so, for the love god and all that is right in the world, ask them to consider another position.  They're clearly not cut out for this one.

[wuzafuzz]

That's about all I got to say about that!

[Lancer]

"I just got this thing, its called Photoshop, and its wicked awesome.. Let me show you!"

Actually it was done in Illustrator Darin... get your Adobe applications straight! 

The P'ing & M'ing in this thread, like others is getting a little old, don't you think fella's? Seriously.

Those that can, do...
those that can do better teach...
those that can't do either one, criticize.

[wuzafuzz]

"I just got this thing, its called Photoshop, and its wicked awesome.. Let me show you!"

Actually it was done in Illustrator Darin... get your Adobe applications straight! 

The P'ing & M'ing in this thread, like others is getting a little old, don't you think fella's? Seriously.

Those that can, do...
those that can do better teach...
those that can't do either one, criticize.

People have a right to express their opinions regardless of their personal skill level on a given task.  Ideally we'll also find a constructive way to share our thoughts with National.  I suppose the bigger question is whether CAPTalk, visible to the public, is the appropriate forum for our informal conversations.

[Pylon]

The P'ing & M'ing in this thread, like others is getting a little old, don't you think fella's? Seriously.

Those that can, do...
those that can do better teach...
those that can't do either one, criticize.

Actually, it's the continual acceptance of low-grade mediocrity from National Headquarters that is really getting old.  Fast.

[Lancer]

Actually, it's the continual acceptance of low-grade mediocrity from National Headquarters than is really getting old.  Fast.

Mike, you know me well enough (at least electronically) to know where I'm coming from. I'll agree with your statement and the change is coming, but it takes time.

This isn't directed at you Mike, but there's constructive criticism and then there is flat out bashing and that seems to come from a lot of folks these days. I always have believed that if you don't like something, DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT! It's that simple.

Think about it for a minute. Say you have an organization called, oh, say... 'The Kieloch Air Patrol' and there was a public forum where members of your organization could discuss all things KAP, and there were a lot of members who did nothing but complain about you and everything you did. Would you want to change how you were doing things to please these people, or would you continue to march to the beat of your own drum? I know the last thing I like is to be criticized for criticisms sake, and for those people that want to do that to me, well they can 'p**s up a rope'.  If you want to help me by working together to fix something you see as a deficiency, then let me know.

We have a way to work stuff up the chain of command; but how many of you contact your wing commander about things you believe need to be corrected at levels above wing? Specifically about how things are ran nationally? I'd say most of you don't. If you did, the agendas for NB meetings would be huge.

I don't know about the rest of you, but I'm not satisfied with taking 'no' for answer for a lot of things...and a negative attitude begets a negative atmosphere.

So, here we are. Happy now?

People have a right to express their opinions regardless of their personal skill level on a given task.  Ideally we'll also find a constructive way to share our thoughts with National.  I suppose the bigger question is whether CAPTalk, visible to the public, is the appropriate forum for our informal conversations.

I've said from pretty much day one of joining here that there should a private section of the site that the general population can't see without taking some trouble to do so. I'm a member of other internet forums, and we do our [censored]ing behind 'closed doors'.

[Pylon]

Well, I can't agree with the "Do something about it" argument in this case, because in this case people are being paid to work on these things.  This isn't an example of CAP only having sub-mediocre marketing because we've just got some volunteers and some good intentions to work with, and a good volunteer stepping in could make a difference.  This is a case of paid staff not having the professional background necessary for jobs of this caliber.  Marketing communications and public relations for a nation-wide organization of CAP's size is not the same as churning out the newsletter for the local free clinic or corner non-profit co-op grocery.

Frankly, if your example above were true -- there was a Kieloch Air Patrol that I was somehow involved with and our membership was pointing out areas where we severely lacked, I'd thank them.  Yes, it smarts to be criticized.  But it hurts the organization much more for professionals in-the-know to not point out areas where CAP needs to improve and simply allow us to continue down the road of mediocrity.

Mike, you know me well enough (at least electronically) to know where I'm coming from. I'll agree with your statement and the change is coming, but it takes time.

I understand the position you're in, also.  I see your sig block there.     But we'll have to agree to disagree, because I do not believe for one second that the right kind of change in this regard is even on the table let alone already in the works.   Yes, change of this magnitude does take time; but I don't believe that is the case now.   It's not that the appropriate measures are underway and it's simply a matter of time for them to be implemented due to staff time and budget constraints.  The individuals in key positions on this matter have yet to see the professional light on this subject and so no movement towards that have been taken.  In fact, recent evidence including the subject of this thread, would certainly suggest that we keep moving away from any decent grasp on our marketing communications, let alone the issue of branding and identity.

I can stand in a classroom (and do) and teach fellow non-profit communications, PR and development professionals about how to improve their game.  I think I could then at least be qualified to point out some short-comings in an organization I know so well.

We have a way to work stuff up the chain of command; but how many of you contact your wing commander about things you believe need to be corrected at levels above wing? Specifically about how things are ran nationally? I'd say most of you don't. If you did, the agendas for NB meetings would be huge.

You should know as well as I do that bringing up concerns to the chain of command does not fix an issue.  Even if a Wing Commander actually cared enough about the feedback from one wing member, there really isn't much that he or she could do by way of agenda item that can fix this issue.


We simply do not use our resources as an organization of our size in an appropriate way.  Our organization could be a household name with widespread community support and better membership performance (both in quality and quantity) -- without changing a thing aside from appropriate management of our identity, marketing communications and PR efforts.

[JC004]

...
We simply do not use our resources as an organization of our size in an appropriate way.  Our organization could be a household name with widespread community support and better membership performance (both in quality and quantity) -- without changing a thing aside from appropriate management of our identity, marketing communications and PR efforts.

w00t!

[A.Member]

Well, I can't agree with the "Do something about it" argument in this case, because in this case people are being paid to work on these things.  This isn't an example of CAP only having sub-mediocre marketing because we've just got some volunteers and some good intentions to work with, and a good volunteer stepping in could make a difference.  This is a case of paid staff not having the professional background necessary for jobs of this caliber.  Marketing communications and public relations for a nation-wide organization of CAP's size is not the same as churning out the newsletter for the local free clinic or corner non-profit co-op grocery.

Frankly, if your example above were true -- there was a Kieloch Air Patrol that I was somehow involved with and our membership was pointing out areas where we severely lacked, I'd thank them.  Yes, it smarts to be criticized.  But it hurts the organization much more for professionals in-the-know to not point out areas where CAP needs to improve and simply allow us to continue down the road of mediocrity.

Mike, you know me well enough (at least electronically) to know where I'm coming from. I'll agree with your statement and the change is coming, but it takes time.

I understand the position you're in, also.  I see your sig block there.     But we'll have to agree to disagree, because I do not believe for one second that the right kind of change in this regard is even on the table let alone already in the works.   Yes, change of this magnitude does take time; but I don't believe that is the case now.   It's not that the appropriate measures are underway and it's simply a matter of time for them to be implemented due to staff time and budget constraints.  The individuals in key positions on this matter have yet to see the professional light on this subject and so no movement towards that have been taken.  In fact, recent evidence including the subject of this thread, would certainly suggest that we keep moving away from any decent grasp on our marketing communications, let alone the issue of branding and identity.

I can stand in a classroom (and do) and teach fellow non-profit communications, PR and development professionals about how to improve their game.  I think I could then at least be qualified to point out some short-comings in an organization I know so well.

We have a way to work stuff up the chain of command; but how many of you contact your wing commander about things you believe need to be corrected at levels above wing? Specifically about how things are ran nationally? I'd say most of you don't. If you did, the agendas for NB meetings would be huge.

You should know as well as I do that bringing up concerns to the chain of command does not fix an issue.  Even if a Wing Commander actually cared enough about the feedback from one wing member, there really isn't much that he or she could do by way of agenda item that can fix this issue.


We simply do not use our resources as an organization of our size in an appropriate way.  Our organization could be a household name with widespread community support and better membership performance (both in quality and quantity) -- without changing a thing aside from appropriate management of our identity, marketing communications and PR efforts.

:clap:  Well said!

I'll also add, more directly, that if National showed any sign of a pulse or responsiveness to member feedback, I suspect that you'd see the form and tone of the feedback change.  As Pylon indicated, some of these people are actually being paid for this.  We should expect better...we deserve better.  It's simply unacceptable (whether you like to hear it that directly or not).

[Lancer]

I'll also add, more directly, that if National showed any sign of a pulse or responsiveness to member feedback, I suspect that you'd see the form and tone of the feedback change.  As Pylon indicated, some of these people are actually being paid for this.  We should expect better...we deserve better.  It's simply unacceptable (whether you like to hear it that directly or not).

You obviously have internet access and a phone...so:

http://members.gocivilairpatrol.com/cap_national_hq/nhq_contacts.cfm

[A.Member]

I'll also add, more directly, that if National showed any sign of a pulse or responsiveness to member feedback, I suspect that you'd see the form and tone of the feedback change.  As Pylon indicated, some of these people are actually being paid for this.  We should expect better...we deserve better.  It's simply unacceptable (whether you like to hear it that directly or not).

You obviously have internet access and a phone...so:

http://members.gocivilairpatrol.com/cap_national_hq/nhq_contacts.cfm

Do you know I haven't?  The answer to that is obviously no. 

More importantly, my suggestion is that you not be so presumptuous about what others may or may not have done.  If you don't know, ask.   So... 

Back on topic...

[Lancer]

Do you know I haven't?  The answer to that is obviously no. 

More importantly, my suggestion is that you not be so presumptuous about what others may or may not have done.  If you don't know, ask.   So... 

Back on topic...

I never said I knew who may or may not have called. A lot of folks will sit behind a keyboard and raise their issue with everyone but the people they should raise the issue with.

Even more importantly, don't assume that what I bring to this conversation is not 'On Topic'.

Is it the most masterful piece of artwork that has been made, no? I don't think it ever was meant to be. It's simple, clean and is similar to other logos we have with the tri-prop.

Next.

[arajca]

Given this new logo, in addition to the various ones that have popped up from National over the past few years indicates they do not have a clue about marleting or branding. My employer has used the same logo since the late 1970's. They've added or removed some trimmings, but the central part hasn't changed. Look at most corporate logos and you'll find the same thing. Occasionally, a company will change it's logo, and when it does, they make a HUGE deal about it and at the same time remove the old logo from EVERYTHING.

CAP has not figured this out. They keep producing these new logos without any plan. IMHO, they need to step back to the CAP emblem and stop any new logos until they can get a PLAN for how to market CAP.

As for them listening to the field, I will mention an example of the "Opportunity Knocks" brouchure that replaced both the senior and cadet brochures. When it was released at the NB meeting (2006?) to a room of volunteers doing recruiting, they were told, unanimously, that it was OK for seniors, but was completely wrong for cadet. Their attitude was not one of accepting criticism. It took three years from them to figure out what the recruiting people told them at that meeting.

[Pylon]

As for them listening to the field, I will mention an example of the "Opportunity Knocks" brouchure that replaced both the senior and cadet brochures. When it was released at the NB meeting (2006?) to a room of volunteers doing recruiting, they were told, unanimously, that it was OK for seniors, but was completely wrong for cadet. Their attitude was not one of accepting criticism. It took three years from them to figure out what the recruiting people told them at that meeting.

Perfect example.  This happens over and over.  Given that, imagine how well feedback is received from those not "in the room" but three or four echelons removed, down at the squadron-level.

Is it the most masterful piece of artwork that has been made, no? I don't think it ever was meant to be. It's simple, clean and is similar to other logos we have with the tri-prop.

Sorry bud, this discussion has very, very, very little to do with how the logo looks.  It's about planning and identity management.

[O-Rex]

I absolutely agree with Pylon: this is not about the aesthetics of the logo designs rather than how CAP wants to be perceived.

Over the past ten years, we've seen a 'curve' as to our corporate versus military branding, the height of which (for Military) was 2004, when the CAP/USAF Aux MAJCOM-syle patch replaced the old round patch on flightsuits, when 'performing missions for america.' was the slogan-those were happy times.

When Tony Pineda was CC, the removal of USAF AUX from aircraft and patches was not about a falling out with USAF (as urban legend would have it) but about branding in such a way that CAP could diversify it's customer-appeal, so-to-speak (remember, he had a law-enforcement background)  I'm not agreeing or disagreeing with the direction, simply making an observation.

Regardless of the envisioned end-state, this branding issue now seems to have become a runaway train.

Granted, CAP is a Federally-chartered non-profit corporation with a "military storefront"  (please don't flame, this is not a criticism, it's just reality..)

Nonetheless, it's the quasi-military aspect that attracts members, cadets in particular; IMHO, it's what gives the organization an edge of sorts.  Otherwise, CAP would be just another after-school activity for cadets, like 4H, DECA, Junior Achievement, etc. etc.  and Red Cross for Seniors.  Not bad in themselves, just not what I think most of our membership is looking for.

It's hard enough for us individually to explain who we are, without having to sift through a multitude of gee-gaws and trendy slogans.

I'd just like for CAP to get past this 'identity crisis," and sincerely hope that by the end of the decade, our programs are not touted as "baked by little elves in a hollow tree..." 

[wuzafuzz]

CAP is in serious need of "Brand-Aid."

Arajca is exactly right, CAP should step back to the CAP emblem.  Future changes should only be made VERY carefully.  Our brand is a huge part of our public identity and should be guarded jealously.  My employer has has the same logo for over 80 years.  We aren't allowed to create internal logos; we are supposed to live the brand internally as well as externally.  It's part of a shared vision.  In contrast, our current CAP branding efforts scream we don't know what we want to be when we grow up.

IMHO, one logo is all we need, individual programs could be identified by simple, but uniform, text below the standard CAP emblem.  Instead of  appearing to be separate organizations, it would educate people about all we do.  "I didn't know CAP did that too!"  Our brand, our image, would be strengthened instead of scattered into the wind.

[Lancer]

Sorry bud, this discussion has very, very, very little to do with how the logo looks.  It's about planning and identity management.

Maybe you might want to go back re-read all the post in this thread because 90% of the posts are smart alec comments on how bad the logo looks.

As you are someone who works in PA for a living, I know how much this pains you. But let me ask you this. Outside of this forum, have you taken any of your outstanding ideas (no, I'm not being a smart alec, I'm being serious) for marketing and IT directly to the people who could use the feedback? If so, what was their reaction?

[JohnKachenmeister]

I agree with Mike.  Our efforts to create a better public image are fractured, and suffer due to the fact that our "Marketing" people do not have a coherent and cohesive plan.  Or, more accurately, they have a "Plan-du-jour" and change the image, logo, slogans, etc on a regular basis.  (Weekly  or daily is an eggageration, annually is not.)

Also, what kills us is the total lack of paid advertisng.  I know this may sound cynical, but money talks.  (and you all know what walks).  I run a small business, and I paid for advertising in a local weekly paper.  After 4 weeks of paying for an advertisement, I got a call from their editor telling me that I was named "Small Business of the Week" by their editorial board, and they wanted to do a feature story on my business.

Do you think "Motor Trend" selects its "Car of the Year" based on performance only?  For the terminally clueless, no, they don't.  They factor in how much the manufacturer pays for advertising.  If the Croations had spent their entire GNP on advertising, the Yugo would have been favorably reviewed!

If the "Marketing" people at NHQ don't know this, then their incompetence is proven beyond a reasonable doubt.

[Flying Pig]

Why don't we just leave it alone all together.  Im not buying another Command Patch.

[JohnKachenmeister]

Why don't we just leave it alone all together.  Im not buying another Command Patch.

Neither am I.  You can have my "US Air Force Auxiliary" patch when you pry it from my cold, dead hand!

[RADIOMAN015]

Also, what kills us is the total lack of paid advertisng.  I know this may sound cynical, but money talks.  (and you all know what walks).  I run a small business, and I paid for advertising in a local weekly paper.  After 4 weeks of paying for an advertisement, I got a call from their editor telling me that I was named "Small Business of the Week" by their editorial board, and they wanted to do a feature story on my business.

If the "Marketing" people at NHQ don't know this, then their incompetence is proven beyond a reasonable doubt.

I don't think fancy new logos OR "paid advertising", etc determine the success of marketing & public relations for ANY non profit organization.  In CAP, it all gets down to what is (or not) happening at the squadron level.  National's support (as well as regions',wings', and were applicable groups') should be geared at providing assistance to the local level PAO's, perhaps with stories that could be placed in the local papers in conjunction with the squadrons' activities.  I don't think nationwide there's a compehensive PAO plan that's been implemented, it all hinges now on the local PAO's capabilities.  IF it is lacking, than there's little coverage in the local media.  IF it is comprehensive than there will be many stories.  My suggestion is simply perform a google news search "Civil Air Patrol", (I think there's a alert function that will send you the news) to see which units throughout the country are being successful.          
RM

[JohnKachenmeister]

Also, what kills us is the total lack of paid advertisng.  I know this may sound cynical, but money talks.  (and you all know what walks).  I run a small business, and I paid for advertising in a local weekly paper.  After 4 weeks of paying for an advertisement, I got a call from their editor telling me that I was named "Small Business of the Week" by their editorial board, and they wanted to do a feature story on my business.

If the "Marketing" people at NHQ don't know this, then their incompetence is proven beyond a reasonable doubt.

I don't think fancy new logos OR "paid advertising", etc determine the success of marketing & public relations for ANY non profit organization.  In CAP, it all gets down to what is (or not) happening at the squadron level.  National's support (as well as regions',wings', and were applicable groups') should be geared at providing assistance to the local level PAO's, perhaps with stories that could be placed in the local papers in conjunction with the squadrons' activities.  I don't think nationwide there's a compehensive PAO plan that's been implemented, it all hinges now on the local PAO's capabilities.  IF it is lacking, than there's little coverage in the local media.  IF it is comprehensive than there will be many stories.  My suggestion is simply perform a google news search "Civil Air Patrol", (I think there's a alert function that will send you the news) to see which units throughout the country are being successful.          
RM

A COMPREHENSIVE plan must include paid advertising.  The last time I took a course in this type of thing, the optimum effect was figured to be about 40 per cent of your total public affairs budget should go to paid advertising.

This paid advertising should be balanced with national and local news releases, local personal contact with news media outlets, and "Public Service" spots.

OK, illustration time:  The U.S. Army makes several types of news release.  Local (Our unit did this new training) (Our base did this environmental thing), National (The Army is getting a new gun), and "Hometown" releases (Local boy finishes Basic) (Local girl gets medal).

The Army also has an extensive paid advertising program, which recently has been targeted to the PARENTS of recruits.  A responsive PA program deals with changing conditions, and recruiters are reporting resistance from parents, not from potential recruits.

On top of that, they make available PSA's to local stations.  Notably, images of the US Army Band playing the National Anthem and filled with patriotic images to be played at station sign-offs.

THAT is what we need to do.  We have a great organization with a great message.  We are burying it by reliance on what mostly are undertrained local PA guys exclusively.

[RiverAux]

Oddly enough NHQ has imposed a requirement that every single squadron develop an annual public affairs plan (whether or not they actually have anyone willing to carry it out), but yet there is no National PA plan that meets the same requirements that everyone else has to meet. 

[A.Member]

Even more importantly, don't assume that what I bring to this conversation is not 'On Topic'.

No assumption was made.  Simply put, it seems that perhaps you got so wrapped up in your own self-righteousness that you lost site of the fact that your [censored]ing about the fact that other people are [censored]ing is definitely not on topic...nor is this resulting banter back and forth.  So, I'm done.

Subverting curse filter - MIKE

[BuckeyeDEJ]

Oddly enough NHQ has imposed a requirement that every single squadron develop an annual public affairs plan (whether or not they actually have anyone willing to carry it out), but yet there is no National PA plan that meets the same requirements that everyone else has to meet. 

If that's true, it's likely because the existing model is that the squadron PA is at the tip of the spear, and that higher headquarters PA functions are generally there to bolster the local guys.

For instance: When NHQ produces radio spots, it's not NHQ that sends them to stations -- they're requested by squadron PAs to distribute themselves to stations. When national news releases are sent out, they're sent to (you guessed it) unit PAs for them to do the legwork.

I'm not saying squadron PAs should do less. I'm saying that it's a bottom-up model when it should be more top-down, or more equalized. There's no reason that everything should come down to squadron PAs (or, in some metro areas, group PAs).

Also: Why are CAP's Web sites not more closely tied to PA than to IT? They're public-relations sites... and we push everything but the kitchen sink at them when we could have public and internal sites (wing level and higher).

[RiverAux]

You are right about PA being a local issue, but we're talking about public affairs issues at a national level in this thread. 

Incidentally, I am aware of the NHQ Public Awareness Plan http://members.gocivilairpatrol.com/media/cms/PA_Plan_updt_0309_3631C952D5D2C.pdf but it is a confusing hodgepodge of things that NHQ intends or wants to do and things that local and wing PAOs should be doing.  It is different than an earlier version but isn't dated so you can't tell how up to date it is. 

And while they're using the new logo that started this thread in many places, their own PA plan uses the current command patch on every page. 

[JohnKachenmeister]

Local PA's need to address local issues.  (Our squadron did this and that)  (Local cadet does good thing).  Local PA's cannot and should not be responsible for targeted national marketing, of which we do zero.

If you want pilots, advertise in flying magazines and on TV and radio programs that flyers watch.

If you want cadets, advertise on MTV, VH1, and in teen-oriented magazines.

If you want military veterans and retirees, advertise in MOAA magazine, and on cable networks like Military History.

The local PA efforts should complement the national effort.  (A local CAP group did THAT?  Hey, I heard about those guys on TV.  Wow, I could join right here!)

While we are on the subject, for the sake of everything that is holy, scrap any advertisement featuring a geeky pre-teen little boy in BDU's.  Geeky pre-teens desperately want to be cool teenagers.  Appeal to that.  Show good-looking cool teenagers in sharp uniforms with lots of airplanes.

Do you EVER see an ad for the Marine Corps that shows an unfocused, droopy-pants, long-haired twit?  No, you don't.  They never feature the raw material, only the finished product.

[BuckeyeDEJ]

While we are on the subject, for the sake of everything that is holy, scrap any advertisement featuring a geeky pre-teen little boy in BDU's.  Geeky pre-teens desperately want to be cool teenagers.  Appeal to that.  Show good-looking cool teenagers in sharp uniforms with lots of airplanes.

HA, HA, HA!

Agreed, however.

There's not a whole lot of dynamism in our recruiting literature. At least from the last full-blown recruiting brochures and posters, the typography is sedate, and the sales pitch is far too wordy. Cadet program literature should say ACTION! and get to the point quickly. Don't tell the whole story -- as any good car salesman will tell you, the magic words "come on down" do wonders. Tease 'em with the basics, and hit 'em up with the whole story at the local unit.

[dogboy]

While we are on the subject, for the sake of everything that is holy, scrap any advertisement featuring a geeky pre-teen little boy in BDU's.  Geeky pre-teens desperately want to be cool teenagers.  Appeal to that.  Show good-looking cool teenagers in sharp uniforms with lots of airplanes.

HA, HA, HA!

Agreed, however.

There's not a whole lot of dynamism in our recruiting literature. At least from the last full-blown recruiting brochures and posters, the typography is sedate, and the sales pitch is far too wordy. Cadet program literature should say ACTION! and get to the point quickly. Don't tell the whole story -- as any good car salesman will tell you, the magic words "come on down" do wonders. Tease 'em with the basics, and hit 'em up with the whole story at the local unit.

Absolutely, get rid of that 12 year old!

[BillB]

Squadron PAO's are partly to blame. How many have sent photos to National showing sharp cadets ith aircraft, or just doing normal cadets activities. Don't blame National for not using photos that local PAO's didn't send in the first place.  And Buckeye, note Johns signature. He didn't renew because of the politics in Florida Wing.
It seems PAO's today are more interested in sending photos PRIOR to chcking that the cadets uniform is sharp, or the activity is of interest to prospective cadets.

[a2capt]

Well, that kid is probably about 15 by now.

[spacecommand]

Absolutely, get rid of that 12 year old!

Did you notice the date of the post you were responding to?


Any case, the one triangle thingy seems to be gone, replaced with a even more simplified triangle thingy (eg the one used on the CAP facebook and here):
http://www.flickr.com/photos/civilairpatrol/

[jpizzo127]

We simply do not use our resources as an organization of our size in an appropriate way.  Our organization could be a household name with widespread community support and better membership performance (both in quality and quantity) -- without changing a thing aside from appropriate management of our identity, marketing communications and PR efforts.

Nailed it.

How is it most of the general public AND active military has no idea who we are? 50,000 members strong, a national presence and the official Auxiliary to the USAF and most people in all levels of government dont even know we exist.