Discussion How do you sell the idea of space exploration to the 'joe public'?

[Kyle]

Saw a thread about it on NSF.com, and I thought it would open an interesting discussion for you guys.

Title states topic.

 

[Donamy]

Get them when they are very young! Inspire them and get there interest in things that will spark their curiousity, to learn about space stuff.

 

[Andy44]

You have to use fear. Fear of the USSR got us to the moon in the old days. Now if we can only convince the public that Al Queada will kill us all unless we return to the moon...

And no, I'm not joking. Well, not completely, anyway (China is the modern day strawman we use, not AQ).

A government-run space program is a giant political target unless it serves some sort of purpose that is perceived to benefit the nation, and which can not be acheived by private or commercial means. I am a space geek, and other space geeks can't even convince me, let alone "Joe Public"...which brings me to another topic:

Your post indicates you think that the public is made up of unintelligent or uninformed people. Use of terms like "Joe Public" and references to believing only Fox News, for instance. This shows an elitist or arrogant attitude on your part, and reduces your desire to fund spaceflight from something nobel to a cynical attempt to talk people you have no respect for into paying for your spaceflight fantasies, and justifying it with the idea that it is for their own good, since they are too stupid to pay for it voluntarily.

 

[BruceJohnJennerLawso]

You have to use fear. Fear of the USSR got us to the moon in the old days. Now if we can only convince the public that Al Queada will kill us all unless we return to the moon...

And no, I'm not joking. Well, not completely, anyway (China is the modern day strawman we use, not AQ).

A government-run space program is a giant political target unless it serves some sort of purpose that is perceived to benefit the nation, and which can not be acheived by private or commercial means. I am a space geek, and other space geeks can't even convince me, let alone "Joe Public"...which brings me to another topic:

Your post indicates you think that the public is made up of unintelligent or uninformed people. Use of terms like "Joe Public" and references to believing only Fox News, for instance. This shows an elitist or arrogant attitude on your part, and reduces your desire to fund spaceflight from something nobel to a cynical attempt to talk people you have no respect for into paying for your spaceflight fantasies, and justifying it with the idea that it is for their own good, since they are too stupid to pay for it voluntarily.

Interesting point, BUT,

Please stop doing that. It drives me nuts when people on this forum feel the need to pick apart perceived motives behind a question. If you cant avoid doing that please dont post okay? I dont think Im alone in saying that Im awfully tired of it.

That being said, I have trouble convincing myself that space exploration is worth it some days. Id say its easiest to convince the public that its worth it when its compared against modern military budgets. My feeling is that space exploration is well worth the funding because it spurs technological research that has a better chance of becoming accessible to the public. If the apollo program had not happened, along with its accompanying small electronics design, I think we would still be at a mid-80s level in consumer electronics, mostly because the military would never be motivated to reveal it as a "military secret". At least, thats my take...

 

[Kyle]

I'm 18 :lol:, I'm hardly the type to have an elitist agenda. Arrogant? Maybe, I'd say more or less generalizing, perhaps a tad bit laced with sarcasm as well .

I suppose though, I'll edit out the original post, to avoid that sense of being perceived to have any sort of arrogant motive.

 

[Andy44]

I'm 18 :lol:, I'm hardly the type to have an elitist agenda. Arrogant? Maybe, I'd say more or less generalizing, perhaps a tad bit laced with sarcasm as well .

I suppose though, I'll edit out the original post, to avoid that sense of being perceived to have any sort of arrogant motive.

I didn't mean to put you down, I'm just saying that if you want to "sell" space to people, you have to stop talking down to them. We all do it. Ever notice how when someone is talking about bad drivers, they never include themselves, for instance?

 

[T.Neo]

I think the answer is fairly simple. Seed the notion that space is mundane. Not unimportant- just real. Not just a setting for Star Trek and Darth Vader, an obsolete rocketpunk notion, or a picture in the sky. An actual physical place that can be visited and researched just like any other.

You don't need to delude the public into thinking that space is a paradise- it is a pretty hostile environment. But we operate in numerous hostile environments. The seafloor, deserts, the antarctic. It isn't a big deal. It does not consume our entire interest or the entirety of government spending. It need not and should not. But we still benefit from the science it provides.

We don't need to pentuple NASA's budget and wear tinfoil hats to make use of space. We can start out small and just do a little science. We could be doing it right now. And when you think about it- that we could be doing that right now, exploring this expanse that's right there waiting for us, it feels rather silly that we're not doing what we could.

NASA needs to do a better job of reaching out to the public in matters of science. Not necessarily PR about launching shuttles or building rockets, or astronauts going to schools and reciting their pre-programmed responses to how people go to the toilet in space, or Sagan-esque cosmologising. But an approachable manner of illustrating what gains are being brought from work done in space- like how the ISS has contributed to research into vaccines, for example. People aren't stupid or vehemently anti-science. They're just not made aware of the things that they could be. And the more you know, the better you realise realise something's value.

 

[Scav]

NASA needs to do a better job of reaching out to the public in matters of science. Not necessarily PR about launching shuttles or building rockets, or astronauts going to schools and reciting their pre-programmed responses to how people go to the toilet in space, or Sagan-esque cosmologising. But an approachable manner of illustrating what gains are being brought from work done in space- like how the ISS has contributed to research into vaccines, for example. People aren't stupid or vehemently anti-science. They're just not made aware of the things that they could be. And the more you know, the better you realise realise something's value.

I don't have much to add here, save this: This is exactly what happened in my school in 1985 -- a rep did visit (primarily to talk about the Space Shuttle) and do exactly what you described. The conversation definitely wasn't toilet-talk -- it was dynamic and quite engaging -- at least for me and a few others.

That rep didn't reach everybody. That rep probably didn't really light any fires in more than half the room that day . . . but it was enough to get a few who already had 'it' . . . to remember it very clearly.

 

[Urwumpe]

They main thing you always need: A space program plan, that survives any serious criticism.

If you can't describe with hard numbers, what you are selling, nobody will buy it.

 

[statickid]

With reality T.V. anything is possible!

Step one:

get a pool of 10 fresh-out-of-college engineers.
make them compete for a full-time job position, working under a hard and decisive lead-scientist

step two:

The project he gets hired into is a "second season" which builds a rocket. there can be another reality show showing the ups, downs, frustrations, and monumental achievements of rocket engineering

step three:

Get a crew: have 10 professionals from different fields compete to have their project included on the flight program. the winner will be a crew member.

step four:

follow the newbie astronaut in their first flight, document their hopes and fears, interview family, latch onto a family member that thinks they are crazy for going into space. show pre-flight see-you-later parties and the season finale will be the tense life or death deorbit, the narrator can hype up the dangers of reentry

 

[mojoey]

and if he dies, more advertising?

 

[Ghostrider]

You don't sell anyone the idea of space exploration.

You cram it down their throat, douse them with rocket fuel and tell them if they don't get on with the (space) program, ignition sequence starts about NOW.

 

[fsci123]

My two cents: public opinion will always be the same no matter how you try splatter facts and figures on their plates. And generally the more people you draw to your cause the more the opposing side gets more vocal.

I personally think that the two best ways you could encourage more space travel is if you make some sort of space marine program or you could make space travel cheap enough so that private enterprise plays a greater role...

 

[MattBaker]

Space exploration is not about putting money somewhere so some geeks have a decent life. Space exploration is about learning how the Universe looks like, where it comes from, how everything happened and last but not least if we're the only "intelligent" lifeform out there. It's not about learning anything, it's about learning about yourself, your origin. There are a lot of things that make us humans human, but one of the maybe most important things is our curiosity and this curiosity seeks satisfaction in challenges and what else than this faustian search to know everything is a bigger challenge?

The money we put into that does not end up on the surface of another planet or somewhere in outer space, it ends up in the pocket of engineers and companies that are willing to take the risk of sending rockets and probes hailprobe "up there". It's not like foreign aid that ends up somewhere in Africa or the Middle East, it ends up in pockets of your countrymen, who are smart enough to contribute to one of the most complicated things we're currently doing in science. And there are thousands of people, from visionaries like Elon Musk to the cleaning lady at the JPL who earn their money because we are willing to do this, because we're curious and that makes us.


That's how I would put it, inspired by too many...

 

[Capt_hensley]

Economics will always drive any space program. We need money to fly, its that simple. If a program can make it's own money, its even better. Multinational projects can bring more money, but in the end, it boils down to what we get for our dollar, euro, or rouble.

 

[PhantomCruiser]

I think I heard that before...

"No bucks, no Buck Rogers"

It's really hard to get some people that I know interested in space science and exploration. "We could use that money elsewhere" is usually their argument. They little understand how NASA (and ESA too for that matter) manage to do so much with so little when compared to other programs.

That's one of the reasons that I am all for the commercialization of space. NASA will always have the job of space science (hard to find a better group of researchers and problem solvers).

I think T.Neo hit it on the head. People must see some of the "end results", in addition to their miniaturized-solid-state electronics, there must be something tangible for the public at large to see the benefits of space science.

 

[Ark]

Andy's right, fear is the only thing that ever accomplished significant gains in space exploration. We need alien invasion or Al Qaeda on Mars.

 

[Unstung]

Not even during the 1960s did NASA have a majority of public support. People think space exploration costs more than it actually does because some of the programs NASA has are extremely visible and are very technologically complex. Citizens may only care about themselves and their conditions, such as taxes and social security. If something does not directly affect them or they cannot understand it, it's unimportant. NASA is often irrelevant to the public which does not know much about science or technology. Giving those who live in this country a better, more thorough education may let them think more critically about how the government spends money.

NASA is not a huge agency so it can be cut more easily, but if enough people support it, maybe it will spread through Congress.

 

[statickid]

just make "pale blue dot" required high school reading

 

[Keatah]

You speed it up. Simple robotic probes to other planets take 10 or more years to plan. And you remove politics. Politics gets in the way of everything. And you eliminate a lot of distractions in society, not to mention tabloid trash news.