Public Affairs lacking on all levels.

[Smithsonia]

Maj. Kachenmiester;

Do as you please. On this subject, I never try to change minds. If you like it that way, then do it that way. Just don't complain when people don't "get us." My advice is understand and practice the narrative process. Suck the reader in. Draw them to the center of the story. Make them live inside your words and outside their bodies. Pictures are seldom the center of gravity. Make a picture a bigger thing than it is and you'll always be frustrated -- that's what photographic studios are for -- to perfect pictures. In the media, writers who recognize a colleague can only write to picture will say things like, "nice caption." Nice caption, in this case, is not a compliment.

Try this -- writing anything BUT journalism. Make a go of that. In other words don't write to any pictures whatsoever. Learn to -- Own the interior monologue of the reader and they'll forgive you the uniform gig. Now the question becomes, can you forgive? Can you get over that uniform issue? Can CAP? I can't help you. I can only ask the question. By the way, and I've said it before, house organs (Volunteer) are different from news stories, which are different from "learn the craft" practice writing, which are different from Mission IOs, which are different from writing histories, which are different from... Become good at all of these and you'll become better at each of these.

When I teach writing I ask trained solid credited and otherwise qualified professionals to bring in some of their "other than journalism" writing. Most have none. Then the course is taught from the basics up. So make up a story. Do a little fiction. Own the reader. Don't worry about the picture. Feel the difference. Become a craftsman. Get better from this experience.
With regards;
ED OBRIEN

[JohnKachenmeister]

Maj. Kachenmiester;

Do as you please. On this subject, I never try to change minds. If you like it that way, then do it that way. Just don't complain when people don't "get us." My advice is understand and practice the narrative process. Suck the reader in. Draw them to the center of the story. Make them live inside your words and outside their bodies. Pictures are seldom the center of gravity. Make a picture a bigger thing than it is and you'll always be frustrated -- that's what photographic studios are for -- to perfect pictures. In the media, writers who recognize a colleague can only write to picture will say things like, "nice caption." Nice caption, in this case, is not a compliment.

Try this -- writing anything BUT journalism. Make a go of that. In other words don't write to any pictures whatsoever. Learn to -- Own the interior monologue of the reader and they'll forgive you the uniform gig. Now the question becomes, can you forgive? Can you get over that uniform issue? Can CAP? I can't help you. I can only ask the question. By the way, and I've said it before, house organs (Volunteer) are different from news stories, which are different from "learn the craft" practice writing, which are different from Mission IOs, which are different from writing histories, which are different from... Become good at all of these and you'll become better at each of these.

When I teach writing I ask trained solid credited and otherwise qualified professionals to bring in some of their "other than journalism" writing. Most have none. Then the course is taught from the basics up. So make up a story. Do a little fiction. Own the reader. Don't worry about the picture. Feel the difference. Become a craftsman. Get better from this experience.
With regards;
ED OBRIEN

Ed:

I like your approach.  In military PA, we have been taught that we should endeavor to send a picture because editors like pictures.  What is left off of that cognition is the fact that editors like GOOD pictures, pictures that aid in telling the story.

But without a picture, you can still have a good story.

I went to DINFOS, and I will agree with you, the writing that you are taught is boilerplate.  You can read any story by any DINFOS grad and the are almost interchangeable.  That works for hard news stories (Three injured in tracked-vehicle rollover) but is not as good for features, magazine articles, and similar outlets.

That means, I think, that military PA guys like me are sort of like dogs.  Pet dogs stay in a kind of canine adolescene their entire lives, never maturing to the point that they can hunt on their own, because the don't have to.  Military PA guys stay at the level of a basic newbie journalist... capable of hard-news stories and obits... until they return to their regular assignments.  Personally, I struggle with feature leads to this day.

But CAP PA guys are even worse.  They are expected to learn the craft in a supervised OJT environment.  Until they reach the "Master" level, they would not know a good, newsworthy story and a quality picture if it bit them on the leg.

Improving the training of unit-level PA guys in CAP with a formal, classroom experience would help a little, but there are not enough people in CAP that know enough about public affairs to teach them anything beyond the absolute basics.

[RiverAux]

The CAP PAO communique had this in it:

Civil Air Patrol Public Affairs Officer Course – Everyone who has wondered why the ECI (now AFIADL) CAP Public Affairs Officer 02010 correspondence course talks about mimeograph machines, typewriter ribbons and gluepots, but makes no mention of the Internet, Web sites or e-mail, can rest easy. NHQ/PA has authorized a committee to develop a new basic training course for our PAOs that will ensure they have the skills they need to comply with CAPR 190-1. Chaired by Capt Steven Solomon, the SER director of public affairs, along with members 1st Lt. Don Penven of the North Carolina Wing, 1st Lt. Jeanne Stone-Hunter of the Wyoming Wing and Julie DeBardelaben and Jim Tynan, both of CAP National Headquarters, the committee's goal is to make the course relevant to today's PAOs as they satisfy the CAPP 201 Technician Rating requirement. Send comments to SSolomon@sercap.us.

So, now is your chance to start changing things.....

[BuckeyeDEJ]

I agree that if you're going to write for the media, or for ANY external source, you follow the AP stylebook. Period.

The first three words I heard in my first newswriting course in college: Accuracy, accuracy, accuracy. Misspelled names in an assignment got an automatic F. So you can bet we knew the difference between ANG and ARNG, not that we used those acronyms in stories.

If public affairs efforts are lacking on all levels, it's because we're not doing our jobs individually as CAP members. Honestly, if I'm an IO for a mission, when I'm taking pictures, I avoid people in golf shirts (do we want the flying-club perception?) and improperly worn uniforms. I wish the people who submit photos to the Volunteer would do the same, but instead, here's a few glaring issues from the last edition:

-- Some bozo in an Air Force flight suit with a goatee. Where's the respect?
-- Additional patches below the zippers on the front of a flight suit. Where's the attention to detail?
-- IDs hanging from flight suit zipper pulls, with pockets hanging open. Where's the pride?

And that's just three examples. Adobe Photoshop can't possibly fix everything. It's up to unit commanders to ensure proper uniform wear. But it starts with us policing ourselves and each other.

There's all this talk about uniforms in CAP, almost as if there are people who just joined to wear one. But for all the talk, there's one unavoidable premise, and it's one everyone should memorize and repeat to others: If you don't have the discipline to wear the uniform correctly, how can you be trusted to have the discipline to follow other regulations?

I went off in the "Uniform" forum about Volunteer so bad the topic got locked.  I pointed out the same things.  Is the editor of Volunteer even a member?

I went through active duty training as a PAO at DINFOS, and their standards were just as high or higher than the J-schools.  That's why I go ballistic about CAP PAO's turning in garbage for copy and CAP editors not smelling it.

Hey, now! I disagree. Journalism school graduate here, with a resume I'd put up against most anyone's, including stops in major-metro markets. DINFOS wouldn't get me there.

CAP PAs DO turn in garbage. NHQ editors can't catch it all. At wing level, they just let it fly many times. That's why we need to raise the bar for PAs at squadron level. The AFIADL-or-whatever-it's-called-today CAP PA course is a great start, but it probably wouldn't hurt to do a face-to-face course as well.

You'll never get J-school or DINFOS experience in CAP, but the more a PA learns, the better. The CAP PA needs to know and appreciate that he or she is at the tip of the spear when it comes to presenting CAP to the public. With a bad image, people turn up their noses.

We need to have PAs who are on the ball, and can think quickly on their feet. And at group level, we definitely need the best PAs, both as a backstop and an editor for squadron PAs. No 75-year-old, half-Alzheimer member should be thrown into PA just to hold a position (it's better for the group PA to carry that squadron's PA duties if there's no one who can do it well). The PA needs to wear the AF uniform, wear it well, and present a professional military image...

I've realized I'm ranting. Sorry, but feel free to add to this what your idea of a good PA should be.

[Smithsonia]

Guys... this is great. Three whole comments about craft first and uniforms second. This is a most positive trend. I'm much impressed and happy to have been of service. Or at least been provocative enough to niggle on your brains.

I left college early so I could work on a paper. I've been through every town and done every dirty job there was to learn. I've cleaned toilets to learn. I've made coffee to learn. I've been drank under the table more than once so I could go out with the old bulls to hear their war stories... to learn. Now I'm an old bull.

No matter what you talk about... if you know the craft it can be made an interesting thing. It can sparkle and dance at the end of dangling metaphor. I started off by wondering, "How'd they do it?" Make something as mundane as a class reunion, a meeting at the airport, or a shopping trip to the mall -- meaningful. Now I know. It's the hardest [darn] work there is in the world. It made Hemingway commit suicide and crushed Scott Fitzgerald into a gin tanker. It's life and death, it human and it's so very inhumane. BUT, once the words are inside of you. Once you are both their servant and master... there is nothing to do ... but your best. Find the right words and everyday left to you will be full.
With regards;
ED OBRIEN

[BuckeyeDEJ]

Oh, one other thing.

There was an earlier post in this thread that seemed (at least to me) to minimize the impact of a good photo, versus the written word.

Words are nice, don't get me wrong, but photos have more impact, especially in a society that's more and more visual. Before someone whips out that stupid cliche, "a picture is worth a thousand words," that photo can scream lots more than that, especially when the content is dead-on. If the photo is an image that can sink a thousand ships, it doesn't help our cause.

Throw too many words out there, and everyone glazes over. We're learning that the hard way in the newspaper industry, and we've learned it too [darn] late. That's why you're seeing so much alternative storytelling.

It may also be why CAP's recruiting literature has historically been more boring than Reader's Digest....

[Smithsonia]

Maj. Jessmer
I'm not against good photos. I'm for good photos AND good writing. Mundane photos need better writing. Writing down to the level of the photo is certainly less than an journalistic achievement. Not telling a story because you don't have a photo is not good either. If you can only write to picture, you haven't worked long enough on the craft. If a photo is worth a thousand words... then let it. Life Magazine could pull it off. Look Magazine could pull it off. For the rest of us... well, we should be prepared to add a little something. Those magazines had the best photographers and lot's of them -- you may too-- I don't -- so, I learned to write.

With regards;
ED OBRIEN

[Major Carrales]

Maj. Jessmer
I'm not against good photos. I'm for good photos AND good writing. Mundane photos need better writing. Writing down to the level of the photo is certainly less than an journalistic achievement. Not telling a story because you don't have a photo is not good either. If you can only write to picture, you haven't worked long enough on the craft. If a photo is worth a thousand words... then let it. Life Magazine could pull it off. Look Magazine could pull it off. For the rest of us... well, we should be prepared to add a little something. Those magazines had the best photographers and lot's of them -- you may too-- I don't -- learn to write.

With regards;
ED OBRIEN

Good photos with good captions tend to run in newspapers over well written articles.  Sort of like a "sound-byte" in print. 

In the end, it all depends on the publication in question.

[Smithsonia]

Riveraux, Maj. Jessmer and Captalkers; (Regarding military PA)
May I offer a near-to-over-wrought idea... one that is true but full of regret. Public Affairs failings are costing American lives in the military and in the field. The Jihadist's have a narrative that is compelling, although not true. It has launched suicide bombers, caved in buildings, blown-up weddings, destroyed funerals, and killed many many Americans.

It is fundamentally "a of war of words." In this war: a modern, highly trained, steeped in craft, dynamic professional cadre of PAOs can become the tip of the spear and draw tears instead of blood.

As certainly as Navy Seals, Armored Humvees, Delta Force, and Aircraft Carriers... a good Public Affairs Team can make a difference. I'm not talking about Psy-ops. I'm not talking about propaganda. I'm talking straight public affairs. I'm talking men and women who chase down every dirty lie, intercept every salacious rumor, and kill every slandering word with logic and narrative.

In this way Public Affairs can be more than inspirational... it can be aspirational, as well.

It'll take a generation to train them. Although in my idea -- we should reinstitute the draft... but for top flight media professionals only. We should send them right up to the razors edge and in harms way. We don't need a bigger bomb... we need a better story. We need 200 Ernie Pyle's (and 50 more that are Arabic Speaking Ernie Pyles) as fast as we can. We need a factory working 3 shifts a day, seven days a week, to turn them out.

Sign me up. I'm old (56) and crazy (I've been in the media since I was 14) but I'm good to go. Lash me to a tank, give me a camera, a cell-phone, a pad, and a pencil... and by-god... watch the difference it'll make. (slight exaggeration for editorial splendor but you get the idea)

If the power of narrative can light this fire... then a better narrative can put it out.
With regards; ED OBRIEN

[afgeo4]

You guys seem to forget the major difference between the press and government public affairs.

The difference is simple:

1. Press exists to tell the story in order to influence the reader (money)
2. Gov't PA exists to tell the story in order to influence the reader (power)

Yes, the answers seem similar at first sight, but when you really look into it, it's a whole other ballgame.

The military isn't interested in stories that sell. They want stories that justify. After all, the people and government budget makers need justification for all the money spent and all the money that needs to be spent.

The press couldn't care less about justification. They want readers to either take their personal/corporate stance in order to profit in a future venture... or they simply want to sell ad space in order to generate revenue.

Let us not compare the two. Let us not even talk about journalism. Let us define what Public Affairs is.

Isn't Public Affairs the creation and upkeep of the organization's image in the eyes of Americans?

If it is, then anything that falls into that category is Public Affairs and anything that is detrimental to that goal goes against our Public Affairs mission and against our organization.

[Smithsonia]

Capt. Luyre;

Points 1 and 2 are a false premisses. There are so many reasons to tell a story and so many agendas depending on what you're writing, for whom you are employed, what your readers expect, etc., So I disagree with those items in your posting as an over simplification in the extreme. For instance, I'm writing this for the educational benefit of people I do not know. BUT, I write for entertainment, moral lessons, relief of boredom, anger, and pleasure also, and that's just me.

To your main point. We gotta change the system for very simple reasons.
1. The old one (PA mission) is broke.
2. Soft-Craft items (advertising, public relations, publicity, marketing, etc.) are Managed By Objective in the military and most Federal Agencie's PA shops. Which is fine except: a) it's easy to pervert or corrupt the objective. Cover your boss first and deliver public information second -- seems to be in vogue at the moment. At the moment loyalty trumps competence. You need both. b) the quantifying metrics are easy to manipulate. Statistics are as slippery critters as opinions are. For instance, bad metrics are screwing up political predictions in the last 2 Presidential Elections. c) the people managing the objective come and go every few years. Unfortunately mission definitions come and go too. Staff can wait out almost any change. Every manager can not. Neither can every mission. I'm working this puzzle for a client tonight.

Image management comes in so many forms. The old style "spin it until you wear out the other guy," is not going to work. We're all smarter than that. SO, there is a change-a-comin.
To do this:
Better metrics must be established. Better management must be employed. Better missions must be
mounted. Visionary Strategies and Greater Longevity would help too. For most PA problems: it's corrupted missions, using improper metrics, executed poorly, over a short time span, with bad results, that will be repeated quickly and often. So, stop making the same mistakes. Do something better.

First, quit thinking PA is a backwater small time gig and please don't buy another pig then ask me to put more lipstick on it... that hasn't worked the last 4 million times you tried it.

To that point, the best Medical Schools are Stanford and Harvard. The Best Law School is Yale and Harvard. The Best Engineering School is MIT and Cal-Tech... the Best PA School? According to US NEWS and WORLD REPORT. The University of Syracuse. I have nothing against U of S... but what if Harvard, Yale, and Stanford took PA seriously too it might mean something. That said, PA is not an academic enterprise... it's a craft-skill. PA is taught by the best practitioners to their staffs as a mentor and in a craft-guild way. Find a smart PA practitioner to learn from and let everything else run off you like rain... and you'll be fine in the Media/PA game.
With regards;
ED OBRIEN

[JohnKachenmeister]

Ed:

Let me share with you the basic lessons I took from DINFOS so many years ago, and tell me where I have gone wrong.

1.  The PA guy is the spokesman for the organization.  He should be at the side of the boss, and involved in every major (and most minor) decisions.  Perceived minor decisions sometimes have major consequences in the public mind.

2.  I've said it before, the PA practicioner is the organization's lawyer in the Court of Public Opinion.  This is not to say (as has been flamed at me) that PA people should adopt the lawyer's ethical stance, which is NO ethics at all.  Rather, the PA practicioner should act as both an advocate for the organization and an advisor, providing information to decision makers about the anticipated public reaction.

3.  The PA professional shares a skill set with journalists, the ability to write and speak well, and to prepare professional news copy.  This is because most of the public gets its information from news media, and that is one vehicle for reaching the target audience.  The PA professional, however, must also seek out new ways to communicate, and not limit himself to the role of "Stringer."

4.  You must give the same message to internal audiences that you give to external ones.  This is because your internal audience is out there communicating all the time with your external audience on a personal, one-on-one basis.

[Smithsonia]

RiverAux;
I certainly agree. Well said. I hate the lawyer analogy, as you know, but inside each analogy there is room to maneuver a peaceful coexistence.

Why does man write? Why does man care about what others do? Why is anything on paper worth more than an actual experience? These are good questions to answer for yourself. It lays a good ethical foundation.

Considering 1/3rd of all human activity is story based (all media, religion, internet, dreaming, social interaction, education, sports when you're a spectator, etc) accepting your place in the firmament of storytellers will lead you to higher achievement.

Even business is story based as all investments are first a call for human enterprise and capital... the call is made in the form of a story.

It's a great topic for discussion. BUT more, it's a fabulous calling. All things being equal, the best story wins. All things being equal, he who dies with the best stories spoken about him and kept in the hearts of those that remember him, wins. (Of course, "her" in that statement, works equally well) Storytelling is the best job you'll ever get and I wish you well in every endeavor.

With regards; ED OBRIEN

[aveighter]

This discussion is becoming esoteric to the point of irrelevance.

Bottom line here is the editorial choices regarding content and photo selection range from ho-hum to incompetent to outrageous. 

I suspect that the editorial oversight and issue planning have, in fact, been outsourced to a former call center in India.

[Smithsonia]

(Being that this is the basic skill of PA) Writing is an individual journey. Go if you like. Stay home if you don't. It's up to you. Thanks for your kind attention. Good luck to all. ED OBRIEN

[afgeo4]

Smithsonian, I think you're reading too much into this. Your commentary is on a writer. Anyone can be a writer, you, me, Joe Schmoe, etc.

I'm not talking about writers. Especially not about amateur writers. I'm talking about Public Affairs vs. Journalism.

Journalists write because it's their job, not because they're bored. They may be bored at the time or they may not be, they may be enjoying the process or may not be. That's unimportant. They have to write to get a paycheck.

Public Affairs people write, organize meetings, create images and generally make sure they're seen because... that's what they do for a paycheck. They may or may not enjoy their job and it doesn't matter either.

Now... when and if you can step back and look at the press and government as an organization and see why it does what it does, you'll probably learn why it does those things that specific way.

[Smithsonia]

George; (regarding statement above)
Anyone can be a writer? Anyone can be a typist, perhaps. When a barista gives me change for my latte he's not really a professional mathematician or a banker. Although he's performing similar actions for pay. Now is this less true for writers and typists? BUT, there are writers and then there are... w r i t e r s.

That said, this isn't a zero-sum-game. You don't need to be wrong for me to be right. I choose to like my writing assignments, work hard, enjoy my clients, make good money, have a long career, and be happy with my choices. Others can hate their jobs, not do well, and be poor performers. I think that's a fairly accurate restatement of your position. Which is true, if not obvious. See, it's not a zero-sum-game. We can both be right and write.

Since the topic is "Public Affairs lacking on all levels," I figured I'd address it from a craft side. But, as I said, do as you please. I think I've stated my case fully, and so I leave you to get a latte... or if you prefer, visit with my banker.

With regards; ED OBRIEN

[jimmydeanno]

The last couple of comments made me think of William Zinser, he says the same thing.  He gives the example of a surgeon who enjoys writing is his free time.  That surgeon calls writing theraputic and relaxing.

Zinser, a professional writer, considers writing to be a gut-wrenching craft.

[afgeo4]

My point was that this thread isn't about writing or writers. It's about Public Affairs in the Civil Air Patrol and how we (CAP members) can improve on it.

[jimmydeanno]

Improving our PA team would benefit from having better writers - it goes hand in hand.  Typically the PAO at a squadron ins't a professional journalist or writer.  Having a team of PAOs without experience or training ins't the best step.

I think that we made good progress with the creation of the PAO academies, but in general our PA system is pretty ramshackle.

Someone mentioned that we should write articles and such if we don't like the product being produced.  I think that if I were to try to write an article it would probably be far worse than what we have now.  But, I don't need to be a movie director to tell you if a movie is good or not.

I don't know what a first step to improving the quality would be, but I'm sure that it has something to do with training and putting the right people in the right spot.