In the latest Military Officers Association Magazine there is an advertisement for a retirement community in Arizona. Not very uncommon to see this type of add in the magazine. However, what was unique was the person that was the advertisement focus was a retired US Air Force Auxiliary Colonel. I have linked the magazine here. The add itself is on page 80. http://www.nxtbook.com/nxtbooks/moaa/mo0108/index.php (http://www.nxtbook.com/nxtbooks/moaa/mo0108/index.php)
Well, at least he's been to encampment! :D
That's funny :D It's pretty cool though he has the National Commander's Citation and Gill Robb Wilson...
Quote from: jimmydeanno on December 28, 2007, 12:07:13 AM
That's funny :D It's pretty cool though he has the National Commander's Citation and Gill Robb Wilson...
Any one here know him personally, or are we merely talking behind his back? I should like to know more about this Col?
Quote from: jimmydeanno on December 28, 2007, 12:07:13 AM
That's funny :D It's pretty cool though he has the National Commander's Citation and Gill Robb Wilson...
I thought it was either one or the other - didn't the GRW replae the NCC?
Gunner
The original GRW was one step below the NCC. Once the NCC was earned the GRW had to be removed. Except for what NHQ told me, five members who earned the GRW under the ole program AND new program could wear both.
Quote from: Major Carrales on December 28, 2007, 12:09:49 AM
Any one here know him personally...
The name sounds slightly familiar, but I don't recall meeting him during my days in AZWG. He would have been in my AO, but he may have been retired or not active. He could have been on my roster, but I don't think I have those records anymore.
What the Crap?! ??? ::)
I've got just two quick questions:
1) Why is that even in the MOAA mag "as it is"?
2) Are CAP types eligible for MOAA? ( Guessing no, but it never hurts to ask)
Sounds like this particular community couldn't rustle up a real 0-6 or GO to endorse their business venture, so they went with the best they could find.
Or...the guy might be a part owner or something.
CAP is not listed as an MOAA membership category on their website.
I am a member of MOAA and I have seen that particular ad a number of times: I just chuckled at the "Aux" byline. I suspect that MOAA will take an ad from just about any "semi-legitimate" organization who wants to advertise in the mag. I doubt that you have to be a member of MOAA to appear in an ad.
And, no, I don't believe that you can be a member as a CAP officer, but you can subscribe to the mag as long as you are willing to pay the cost.
Quote from: bosshawk on December 28, 2007, 04:51:02 PM
I am a member of MOAA
Wiki says Aux's are not eligible: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MOAA
Also, they lost me as a reader as soon as I saw the lame magazine app.
Too bad on page 66, the MOAA article on how officers can volunteer in their off time and give back to the community doesn't mention Civil Air Patrol.
Magazines like MOAA's and other military & professional associations would be great opportunities for CAP to build relationships with reporters or their editorial board to educate them on including CAP where appropriate... and also a place that CAP should be placing recruiting advertisements.
ok, curiosity got the better of me. I'll reserve comment, but here's a snapshot:
From the MOAA website http://www.moaa.org/about/about_mission.htm#Membership:
Membership
Membership is open to active duty, retired, National Guard, Reserve, and former commissioned officers and warrant officers of the following uniformed services: Army, Marine Corps, Navy, Air Force, Coast Guard, Public Health Service, and National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.
Auxiliary memberships also are available for surviving spouses of deceased officers.
Quote from: Pylon on December 28, 2007, 05:20:01 PM
Too bad on page 66, the MOAA article on how officers can volunteer in their off time and give back to the community doesn't mention Civil Air Patrol.
Magazines like MOAA's and other military & professional associations would be great opportunities for CAP to build relationships with reporters or their editorial board to educate them on including CAP where appropriate... and also a place that CAP should be placing recruiting advertisements.
Agreed! NHQ needs to advertise in this and many, many other MAGS. I would start with the national service organizations like VFW, American Legion etc. Then I would run bi monthly ads in AF Times, and Monthly ads in Army/Navy Marine Corps Times. Then I would get as much free space in Base Newspapers as possible. Finally I would run monthly ads in National Newspapers. If I had money left over, I would submit ads to Readers Digest, Time, Life, Boys World, and whatever the Boy scout and Girl Scout magazine is called.
Eclipse: I happen to be a retired Army O-6: that explains how I am a member of MOAA.
I certainly concur that MOAA and lots of other military-connected organizations could make the connection with CAP and both entities would benefit.
I have seen CAP paid advertising in MOAA magazine, but I have not seen any lately.
Quote from: JohnKachenmeister on December 28, 2007, 06:21:04 PM
I have seen CAP paid advertising in MOAA magazine, but I have not seen any lately.
Well that's a positive note at least.
Personally, I'm not a believer in short-run ads or spot advertising (placings one-off ads here and there, when we can afford it). I think smaller (if need be due to budget) but long-term advertising (ad stays in place 8 - 16 months) makes a much greater impact and generates more response for the dollar. People often need to see the same message 7 to 10 times before it sticks, and often even more before they act.
I really believe National-level awareness advertising and building of relationships and awareness with a variety of organizations and publications in demographically rich grounds for us (military officers for example, being one type of great candidate to become a CAP SM) is key to the organizations growth. That will have a far greater impact which is well beyond the reach of the current National awareness and PR campaign: "Let the units get the word out!"
He retired from CAP to accept duties with the AZ Highway Patrol????
Now, its possible to have fairly young CAP "retirees", but in practice I've never heard of anyone retiring who wasn't in their upper 70s.
Isn't this an improper use of the uniform? Isn't something being sold here?
It looks like he was both CC and a Chaplain. Hmmm.
Quote from: ZigZag911 on December 29, 2007, 03:04:18 AM
Isn't this an improper use of the uniform? Isn't something being sold here?
I doubt it. He's not seeking private employment in uniform, and I don't think the org is against the US interests. Could be by implying USAF approval of ad.
From 39-1 in the section with when not to wear the uniform:
Quotewhen furthering private employment or commercial interests, if official sponsorship might be inferred.
emphasis is mine
I think wearing a military style uniform in an ad that is meant to attract military personnel by saying, "military people already like us" constitutes inferred sponsorship of this place by the military, using the name of the CAP. The member may not be purposely implying sponsorship but the advertising people definitely are which makes the appearance in the ad in an uniform improper.
Quote from: Bayhawk21 on December 29, 2007, 04:07:23 AM
From 39-1 in the section with when not to wear the uniform:
Quotewhen furthering private employment or commercial interests, if official sponsorship might be inferred.
emphasis is mine
I think wearing a military style uniform in an ad that is meant to attract military personnel by saying, "military people already like us" constitutes inferred sponsorship of this place by the military, using the name of the CAP. The member may not be purposely implying sponsorship but the advertising people definitely are which makes the appearance in the ad in an uniform improper.
Agreed. This ad is problematic on a number of levels and it should be pulled.
I respectfully disagree.
This is a publication aimed at military people, and he is saying that his personal choice was to live in this community. The fact that he identified a military affiliation to establish his bonafides does not change the fact that he is expressing a personal opinion with regard to this retirement community.
There is no sponsorship implied.
If he wasn't wearing a CAP uniform while doing it, I would agree with you. In uniform he does imply CAP sponsorship.
In that particular magazine, use of military titles is common, and use of photos in uniform is not unheard of. Page 18 has a photo of a retired general now and in uniform during World War II. Page 6 has an ad. for "Air Force Village West" with official seals from all 7 uniformed services.
Given the context, a magazine circulated among active and retired military officers, I don't think anyone will be fooled into thinking that CAP has endorsed or sponsored a retirement community.
If this appeared in a magazine of general public circulation, I would tend to agree with you.
Didn't you ever listen to your mother -- just because everyone else is doing it, doesn't mean its right.
This is an >advertisement< from a real estate company selling houses.
Him standing there in a golf shirt and bad plaid shorts is not going to have the same eye-appeal as what appears at first glance to be a full-bird USAF Colonel.
My guess is that using his photo actually works against them from a credibility standpoint with anyone in the RealMilitary®, but regardless, they are obviously trading on his perceived credibility as a "retired" "officer".
IMHO this is exactly the kind of thing the reg is against - no different than standing in front of an FBO in uniform and saying "As a CAP member, I get all my fuel and maintenance from AV-PRO. You should too!"
It is pretty clearly improper.
The 39-1 spells out when the uniform can be worn in Chapter 1. Members can wear the uniform while conducting CAP business and necessary travel.
It specifically says members may NOT wear the uniform "when furthering private employment or commercial interests, if official sponsorship may be inferred" which is definately possible here.
Or "when engaged in private employment," which also seems likely here.
(See table 1-1)
Further, retired members are not authorized to wear service dress in any event -- see CAPR 39-3 (http://level2.cap.gov/documents/u_120403111801.pdf), specifically para 3-1(c) which suggests that the only uniform authorized for retired members is the blazer combination.
So, I'd like to think that this retired officer either made an innocent mistake or received bad advice.
It's also possible that the regulations have changed since he retired and no one told him.
But it is a little unsavory for anyone to sell anything using a CAP uniform as a prop.
Ned Lee
How friggin ironic is this?
Went to my in-laws for a little shindig and I notice the MOAA magazine so I check out the USAF AUX Colonel. Dad-in-law comes up to me and says "by the way, I hope you don't mind but I put you in for a 12 month subscription for you as a USAF Auxiliary Lt Col". On any other day, I wouldn't have thought twice about it. Funny, huh?
Quote from: Stonewall on December 30, 2007, 02:04:08 AM
How friggin ironic is this?
Went to my in-laws for a little shindig and I notice the MOAA magazine so I check out the USAF AUX Colonel. Dad-in-law comes up to me and says "by the way, I hope you don't mind but I put you in for a 12 month subscription for you as a USAF Auxiliary Lt Col". On any other day, I wouldn't have thought twice about it. Funny, huh?
Yeah.....MOAA ran a December promotion to allow members to give other non-members a free membership for a year. You will get a pretty neat new member package. The organization is great, they are very active in Washington and their other magazine "Today's Officer" is really good.
Quote from: Ned on December 29, 2007, 06:47:24 PM
It is pretty clearly improper.
The 39-1 spells out when the uniform can be worn in Chapter 1. Members can wear the uniform while conducting CAP business and necessary travel.
It specifically says members may NOT wear the uniform "when furthering private employment or commercial interests, if official sponsorship may be inferred" which is definately possible here.
Or "when engaged in private employment," which also seems likely here.
(See table 1-1)
Further, retired members are not authorized to wear service dress in any event -- see CAPR 39-3 (http://level2.cap.gov/documents/u_120403111801.pdf), specifically para 3-1(c) which suggests that the only uniform authorized for retired members is the blazer combination.
So, I'd like to think that this retired officer either made an innocent mistake or received bad advice.
It's also possible that the regulations have changed since he retired and no one told him.
But it is a little unsavory for anyone to sell anything using a CAP uniform as a prop.
Ned Lee
Except Ned, you don't know when the picture was taken. He could have been still active at the time, and gave the developer an old photo of him in uniform to use on the ad.
Again, GIVEN THE READERSHIP of this publication, and the fact that such personal endorsements by retired officers is not uncommon in this publication, I do not think it implies any sponsorship by CAP. If this were in a magazine designed to be read by the general public, I would probably feel differently.
Quote from: JohnKachenmeister on December 30, 2007, 04:58:38 AM
Except Ned, you don't know when the picture was taken. He could have been still active at the time, and gave the developer an old photo of him in uniform to use on the ad.
That would only affect the "retired guys can't wear service dress" prong.
It doesn't affect the impropriety of wearing the uniform for commerical purposes.
Assuming for a moment that some rogue real estate developer did not steal this guy's picture off the refrigerator or dummied up a totally ficticious photo, it means that a retired officer knowingly allowed the name and uniform of CAP to be used to make a buck.
And that's just wrong. Morally and possibly legally. And violates the regulations that bind all members, active and retired.
He's free to endorse any product he'd like as an individual. But the only reason the developer used him was for his CAP title and unform in an attempt to lure military types into spending some money they wouldn't have spent if the picture was just the guy in a civilian suit and tie without a mention of his CAP service.
That's the reaon we have these kind of regulations.