Potpourri CXXXIV

Annnnnd the fun continues...

Something right up Dar's alley: Citizen scientists have an opportunity to contribute to work done on the Moon...counting craters.

From Brother Kanigan: The top 10 stolen body parts in history.
 
From Jerry Pournelle: Some more thoughts on the Greek debt crisis and how it affects/reflects what's happening here in the U.S.
 
From Erin: Your Moment of Coolness for today: a tour of the International Space Station.
 
For my Huntsville friends...some flyover times for the International Space Station.
 
Laser weapons on? Burn ‘em!


For Kate Down Under: Australia developing a space policy (about time, don’t ya think?).


Ohio and Massachusetts are developing their own STEM initiatives. What about Alabama?
 
One of the things I learned to enjoy early on was the art of fine conversation and complex argument. To that end, I'd offer the following series of essays on the topic of "Why aren't there any 'Lester Bangs'-like critics of video games?" That is, why aren't there critics who treat games as a legitimate art form and who have the critical vocabulary necessary to dissect this rather obscure subject? The discussion begins here, with an essay in Esquire Magazine on the topic. From there, move on to Doc's response to the Esquire essay. And, most recently, one can find this scholarly response to Doc's opinion. I'd post my own thoughts on the matter, but I don't play video games anymore, and so am not qualified to comment. On this issue, I'll defer to Doc, though I found the discussion most illuminating.
 
Space Shuttle Atlantis lifted off for its last mission (theoretically). Always fun to watch. Of course if you spend enough time around the propulsion guys around here, you learn not to turn off NASA TV until Main Engine Cutoff (MECO), not just when the fire and smoke are over.


The Bank of England says U.S. faces the same problems as Greece. Well, duhhhhh…




Also re: the oil spill…Dar has started a crowdsourcing initiative on Science for Citizens to solicit ideas for containing the oil spill since nothing else has worked so far.


NBC is canceling the original Law & Order after 20 seasons. Bummer.


CNN has a (very unscientific) poll about people’s perceptions of the state of the economy. Bottom line: it’s not pretty.


Boeing rolls out the Phantom Ray unmanned aerial vehicle.


Legendary fantasy artist Frank Frazetta has died.


Ka-BOOM! A bad day with a cell phone.


Planets and moons and spacecraft, oh my!


Just because a leopard can’t change its spots doesn’t mean a planet can’t change its stripes.


Subtract one…census worker visits a home and finds a dead body.


Something for the Down Under Defense Expert (DUDE): New Zealand’s PM got himself into hot water for making a cannibal joke.


Another bullying story. Bullying is at least partially alleged in the suicide of a young girl in Birmingham. Hate this stuff.


Disney is building a new animation-themed resort at the Walt Disney World property in Florida. My buddy Gwen already called dibs on the room assignment shift. Guess that means I’m stuck on the desk again, darn it. ;-) It will be located down near Osceola Parkway and Disney’s Pop Century Resort and is scheduled to open in 2012. Also in Disney news, despite falls in Parks & Resorts revenues, including at the Disney Cruise Line, the company is betting on an improved economic future. Glad someone is.


A scientist inspired by the Dalai Lama is studying happiness.


Governor Schwarzenegger is seeking deep budget cuts to reduce California’s $20 billion deficit. This bears watching, as does the continuing mess in Greece, which is similar.


Now here's a sport I'd follow next time I visit Orlando...lingerie football!

Damn It

As a frequent visitor to, and former cast member of, the Walt Disney World Resort, you just never want to see or hear about a death at the parks. That it happened on the monorails--one of the quintessential pieces of the Disney experience--makes the accident at Epcot last night all the harder. I've had to respond to deaths on property, and it's never fun or pleasant. You'd like to think that we (sorry, Disney-speak coming back) can suspend reality there, but we can't. Accidents happen, people can get hurt. My condolences to the family of the cast member and the other cast members down there, who will be dealing with this for quite awhile, I fear.

One Gen Xer's View of the Transformation Discussion

I really appreciate being included in the ongoing discussion re: what to do with/about NASA. If I seem to lecture overmuch, I apologize. Part of that is just me, part of it is a habit I picked up from my grandparents, part of it is a sincere desire to see ambitious younger folks not make some of the same mistakes I made at their age. Allow me to ‘splain.

I came to NASA somewhat late in my career. I was 36 when I moved to Huntsville. Before that, I was a proposal writer at a defense contractor in Northern Virginia, and before that I spent 12 years at Walt Disney World, working in a variety of roles, including parks, resorts, IT, HR, and training. Most of the management stuff (e.g. change management) I picked up from reading books from the Disney University library or through writing papers for NASA. Other things, like PowerPoint, I’ve picked up on the job, through my off-duty reading, or in grad school (UCF, M.A. Technical Writing, ’02). I’ve spent my career as an hourly employee or an independent contributor, not as a manager; but I've been supporting managers, from the front line to the executive offices, so I have a pretty good handle on their wants/needs in the field of communication.

I think I learned more about interacting with the public—and management—at Disney than anywhere else. Much of what I learned came about by trying to do things “my way,” which is to say the wrong way, or in a way that usually resulted from arguments with my managers. I was a pain the neck as a 20-something employee and had more than a little impatience and “attitude.” I think it took a second verbal reprimand (guaranteeing that I wouldn’t transfer out of the job I had for at least another year) to realize that my confrontational approach with management was hurting, not helping my career.

If I wanted to stay with the company and improve my circumstances, I had to “play the game,” at least to some extent. That did not mean silencing my beliefs or sucking up to the boss. It did mean not rudely questioning the motives or intelligence of my managers every time decisions didn’t go my way; not demanding changes, but backing up my concerns with facts; and not expecting to advance simply on my own merits. If I wanted to “move up” in the organization, I had to admit (gulp) that my Silent Generation parents and Greatest Generation grandparents were right, and that I needed management coaching and support.

I am not saying Nick and the rest are doing what I did. Quite the contrary: they’ve been a lot more respectful and wise in their approach than I was. I was into my early 30s before I really understood how management thinks. From there, it was easier to know when it was appropriate to speak my mind and try to make changes and when it was better to shut up, wait, or accept things. Again, this was my particular problem, not necessarily others’.

There’s a saying I read recently that sums up my approach to my dispensing of unsolicited advice: “A smart man learns from his mistakes; a wise man learns from others’ mistakes.” So, again, I hope some of this commentary is of benefit, however tactlessly offered. Maybe more folks will learn from me what not to do. In any case, thanks again for reading. As new thoughts or approaches come to me, I’ll be sure to share them.

Should Disney Get a Retired Space Shuttle?

Recently, NASAWatch posted a question on what should be done with the three remaining space shuttles still flying (Discovery, Atlantis, Endeavour) after they retire. Since I spent a lot of my pre-space career at Disney, I thought I'd ask my Disney friends what they thought of the notion that Walt Disney World "get" one of the shuttles. Their responses were interesting:

• "a) I thought Disney was already doing this with Mission: Space.
  b) It's difficult to get people interested in Space by displaying and teaching about obsolete space craft.
  c) Perhaps a display combining the limitations of the shuttle with the possibilities availed to us through a new program?"
• "Makes sense to me! Disney certainly WOULD do a fantastic job displaying etc., certainly would fit in well at EPCOT, and with already having millions of people going to Disney every year anyway ... sounds like a project that's PERFECT for you :)"
• "I think it is a good idea. With so many children visiting the park, perhaps it will be an excellent tool to develop interest. As long as they don't paint anything on the Orbiter, it sounds like a good exhibit."
• "We could build a whole new theme park around it. We could obviously get more people interested in space, I think."
• "Absolutely. That has EPCOT written all over it. You could put it next to Mission Space."

No argument from most of these folks, anyway. This bears some consideration. They all sense an underlying truth: Disney generates fun and excitement; the space program, as it is currently configured, does not. Why?

*

When I came into the space business, it was after 12 years at Disney and 3 years in the defense business development (proposal writing) worlds. I'd also had some experience as a space advocate. My approach to space, then, has been as a marketer. Disney, for all of its internal quirks--notice I don't work there anymore--is a marketing organization second to none. And when I attended my first International Space Development Conference, I noted the serious need for marketing professionalism within the space advocacy community.

Now there are some government regulations that prohibit NASA from marketing, unless it's hiring/recruiting. And, being a government agency, some of its denizens are rather disdainful of the need for marketing at all. "We do education and outreach," I've been told. The "m" word, it seems, is verboten. But really now: what is NASA TV if it isn't marketing? Well, actually, it probably is education, because as a marketing tool, it's not doing well. I think more people watch The Bedouin Channel.

What is marketing, then? Here's a description of marketing that I used in my thesis to contrast it with technical communications:

In general, marketing communications is aimed at decision-makers and influencers, while technical communications addresses people who use the product. In other words, marketers try to get a customer to purchase a product, while technical communicators explain how a product works once it has already been purchased.

A later presentation I did, based on this thesis, also proposed the notion that technical advocacy (e.g. space advocacy) is really a combination of technical communications, marketing, and politics. You need the audience to understand the material, get enthused about it, and get them motivated to advocate and vote in certain ways that are advantageous to your position. Marketing a trip to Disney World is a lot different from marketing a government program (assuming you were allowed to do so), but the concept and need is the same. And, I must add, there is more to advocate for than just NASA. I want the private sector "out there" too, and that requires a different strategy from selling a government program.

Still, both the space cause and a theme park must still get and hold the attention of their respective audience(s). Despite the uniqueness of the space enterprise, exploration and settlement do not "sell themselves," any more than the American West did. Horace Greeley's "Go West, young man, and grow with the country!" might have been one of the best marketing lines ever used to sell the frontier.

I got off my original track here; I apologize. I meant to answer "Why does Disney generate excitement while NASA doesn't?" and got off on a tangent about what technical marketing is. My apologies. The answer to the original question is simple: Disney does exciting things and portrays them in such a way that other people look forward to experiencing them. NASA does some exciting, nay, intriguing things, and some of those are accompanied by smoke, fire, and earth-rattling, which is always cool. But turn on NASA TV, subject yourself to a few hours of watching astronauts do zero-gravity tai-chi around the International Space Station, and you need No-Doze and a caffeineated beverage to restart your system.

Both Disney and NASA are very protective of their public image, and yet Disney manages to have a fun public image. Again: why? Part of it, I think, is that NASA has lost its sense of humor. They are so used to doing Important, Impressive Things, that they forget about the gosh-wow factor. They frown upon frivolous activities, like space tourism or putting a hotel into orbit.

They've also grown a little too cautious about advertising the dangerous aspects of space. In Apollo, three astronauts died before one Saturn rocket had put a man into space--and NASA kept going. Since Challenger and Columbia, there has been an abundance of caution and -- perhaps reasonably -- an emphasis on safety first. But damn it, that danger gets people's attention! It's suspenseful for me every time the Shuttle goes up now, maybe because of long-ignored physical danger and maybe because we're only now awakening to the fact that there won't be too many more of them.

The world frickin' stood still when Neil Armstrong and Buzz Aldrin landed on the Moon. A billion people listened or watched at a time when we had only about two billion people alive on the planet. That's a shared moment of wonder few have ever managed to repeat. I mean, because...damn, that was impressive. The first time a human being had set foot on another world. I can still get a shiver up my spine when I hear, "That's one small step for [a] man, one giant leap for mankind." I was two weeks from being born, and it still impresses me.

That's the trick, then: NASA needs to start doing great things again: firsts that are new and difficult in their own right. And the good news is, they are aiming to do great things again: building rockets to go to the Moon, building a permanent outpost there, and hoping to go beyond. That's half the Disney equation: do something exciting. All of that will require more money and sustained commitment, but that's our job as involved taxpayers, not just the government's. And then there's the other half: get other people interested in participating. There's still some work to be done there.

Looks like I have my work cut out for me.