Marvel to Space - Opinion?

[p1t1o]

So there's this:

http://io9.gizmodo.com/groot-and-rocket-raccoon-to-be-sent-into-space-sort-of-1784161530

Is this a depressing evolution of the conquest of our normal lives by out-of-control capitalism?

Or:

Is this a hopeful look towards a brighter future by introducing the general public more and more to the world of space travel/industry?

Or:

Is this, in fact, not really that big of a deal?

[RainDreamer]

Whatever it takes to fund the space programs.

[Just Jim]

I would say not just funding, but PR.  I watch a lot of NASA TV, and lately they've started reaching out to young adults thru social media and such to get people interested in space. It's no different than NASA taking an interest in KSP, really.  This patch, to be, just seems like another way to reach out.

And they probably got some much needed funding from Marvel as well.

Edited July 25, 2016 by Just Jim

[adsii1970]

17 minutes ago, Just Jim said:

I would say not just funding, but PR.  I watch a lot of NASA TV, and lately they've started reaching out to young adults thru social media and such to get people interested in space. It's no different than NASA taking an interest in KSP, really.  This patch, to be, just seems like another way to reach out.

And they probably got some much needed funding from Marvel as well.

Lest we forget NASA's effort in the 1950s and 1960s... Before the American public began to have the "meh, it's just another launch..." NASA was active in reaching out to the nation's young people and out to the general population through a variety of means. During graduate school, I was interviewing people about what they remember from the time when Sputnik was launched; the things I was told simply blew me away.

Even if it were only amateur astronomers, there were people who "represented" NASA at local science fairs, who would show up at Boy and Girl Scout meetings, or any other venue where the promotion of engineering, mathematics, or sciences could be accomplished. Products used by the space program became sponsors of television and radio serials once they were approved for public sale, and even comic books featured well-known figures within America's space program.

By the time the Apollo missions ended in the early 1970s, EVERYONE knew that Tang, velcro, pop-rocks, plastic cling wrap, zip-seal bags, instant coffee, and "astronaut pens" (Originally made by Fisher) had all come from the space program. But the contributions to modern life didn't stop there - there would later be microwave ovens, solar panels, Teflon coating, lithium batteries, butterfly sutures, polarizing sunglasses (and their cousin, self-tinting glasses), spray skin adhesives, and shielded coaxial cable - just to name a few. Maybe it is time we started promoting the benefits of an active and innovative space program to the general public.
 

Edited July 25, 2016 by adsii1970

[adsii1970]

6 hours ago, RainDreamer said:

Whatever it takes to fund the space programs.

No, it should be - whatever it takes to generate interest in the space programs.

As an unspoken rule, especially in Western politics, responsive governments will only fund programs for one of two reasons:

1. There is such a desire to see the program funded by the the public that to refuse to would be near-political suicide for the party or individual in power; or
2. There are security interests, economic interests, or other national advantages that the program brings to the nation.

One of the reasons NASA was able to achieve the Moon landings within ten years of President Kennedy's promise is that the American public saw the necessity of the space program and pressured its politicians (if you remember Senator Walter Mondale, later VP under President Carter, actually tried to kill NASA after Apollo 1, public outrage to his position is one of the reasons NASA survived). This also added to the pressures of national security with the fears of Soviet dominated space and the possibilities for economic growth expected from the investment in the space program. Space exploration was seen as vital to American domestic interests, its own national security, and its economy.

Luxembourg, Denmark, Sweden, the United States, China, Japan, India, and Germany all have private companies that are interested in the economic potential of space, including Lunar production facilities, asteroid mining, and even tourist/commercial spaceflight. Make no mistake about it, and as Isaac Asimov said, mankind's future is in space.

Personally, I believe that these companies and like-minded individuals actually scare national leaders we have today. If spaceflight becomes feasible and colonization of the Moon or Mars even remotely possible, what would prevent migration, much like what happened with the discovery of North and South America, from happening again? How would these governments maintain control over such distant colonies (no possible way, in reality)? How would those nations account for such a loss of potential wealth? If the nations of the world had kept the pace that had been started in the 1950s and 1960s, we would already have cities on the moon, orbital platforms, and maybe even just years away from colonizing Mars.

 

Edited July 25, 2016 by adsii1970

[adsii1970]

5 hours ago, p1t1o said:

Is this a depressing evolution of the conquest of our normal lives by out-of-control capitalism?

I really dislike statements like this for several reasons and will be happy to answer this question in a private message. Because we are not supposed to discuss politics in this forum, I will refrain from discussing this publicly... (see, @Vanamonde, I can resist low hanging fruit... I guess all those "mild infraction of Forum Rule 2.2 warnings have paid off...! )

[p1t1o]

5 minutes ago, adsii1970 said:

I really dislike statements like this for several reasons and will be happy to answer this question in a private message. Because we are not supposed to discuss politics in this forum, I will refrain from discussing this publicly... (see, @Vanamonde, I can resist low hanging fruit... I guess all those "mild infraction of Forum Rule 2.2 warnings have paid off...! )

Well the reason I setup the poll was because when I saw the article, I wsan't sure which way I leant, to optimism or pessimism - so wanted to put it to a group. Im glad that the prevailing opinion leans towards the brighter side  

Empty marketing and branding purely motivated by profit (and/or basically arbitrary marketing doctrine) is a bit of a pet peeve of mine, but on the other hand I know that having "pet peeves" can make one overly pessimistic when they appear. 

[adsii1970]

1 minute ago, p1t1o said:

Well the reason I setup the poll was because when I saw the article, I wsan't sure which way I leant, to optimism or pessimism - so wanted to put it to a group. Im glad that the prevailing opinion leans towards the brighter side  

Empty marketing and branding purely motivated by profit (and/or basically arbitrary marketing doctrine) is a bit of a pet peeve of mine, but on the other hand I know that having "pet peeves" can make one overly pessimistic when they appear. 

Is there really any such of a thing as "empty marketing?" I was trained in brand identity and marketing by a rather large non-profit organization (that I will not name here on the forum) and can tell you that marketing has a purpose - to increase consumer awareness of a product, service, or name recognition of an organization. It is why both Pepsi, Coca Cola, and many other corporations spend lots of money to have their products featured in movies and television. It creates additional revenue, interest, or even participation in whatever it is being brought to the public mind...

[LordFerret]

1 hour ago, adsii1970 said:

By the time the Apollo missions ended in the early 1970s, EVERYONE knew that Tang, velcro, pop-rocks, plastic cling wrap, zip-seal bags, instant coffee, and "astronaut pens" (Originally made by Fisher) had all come from the space program.

I remember all of those, and the advertising which went along with it - aligned to space program activities. You forgot "Space Food Sticks" (http://spacefoodsticks.com/) and "Shake-a-Puddin".

There's something we had back in the 50's and 60's that we don't have today, it was key (one of them) to the success of our space program... it's called national unity. To get back there, ya'll have to get over yourselves and lose your labels.

[p1t1o]

15 minutes ago, adsii1970 said:

Is there really any such of a thing as "empty marketing?" I was trained in brand identity and marketing by a rather large non-profit organization (that I will not name here on the forum) and can tell you that marketing has a purpose - to increase consumer awareness of a product, service, or name recognition of an organization. It is why both Pepsi, Coca Cola, and many other corporations spend lots of money to have their products featured in movies and television. It creates additional revenue, interest, or even participation in whatever it is being brought to the public mind...

Well, I could talk for a while about what I think is bad about marketing, how I understand that not every industry/company is the same and not all marketing is bad in-and-of-itself but I dont want to derail the thread with boring discussions about work

Suffice to say quite a lot can be summed up by: decent pair of jeans = reasonable price, half-decent pair of jeans with a Levi logo = absolutely flipping ridiculous price. There's brand recognition and profit generation, and then there's just being...for want of a looser forum filter...a big bag of sausages.

I just dont want to read in a headline sometimes in the future something like "Today the OchreManta probe was dispatched proudly bearing a 2-foot nickel-cadmium Iron Man statue, this will be the furthest a Marvel representation has travelled into the solar system, although it doesn't quite match the DC record for a 270kg solid iron Batman that went to Neptune last year. See pages 2-11 for a full breakdown. For scientific news on the matter see page 398. For sex tips, see the rest of page 398."

[LordFerret]

As for the poll, I don't see it a big deal. I don't necessarily see it as a marketing ploy either. Remember, a little beagle named Snoopy was the first.

[adsii1970]

1 minute ago, LordFerret said:

As for the poll, I don't see it a big deal. I don't necessarily see it as a marketing ploy either. Remember, a little beagle named Snoopy was the first.

And we all know he was the one who shot down the Red Baron!

[Andem]

I dunno... I hate to be the slippery-slope~logical fallacy guy, but I don't want the McDonald's arches to have a spot on the ISS either. If it was, say, an action figure or a doll that would be one thing, but It doesn't seem right to put on a mission patch.

[pincushionman]

52 minutes ago, LordFerret said:

As for the poll, I don't see it a big deal. I don't necessarily see it as a marketing ploy either. Remember, a little beagle named Snoopy was the first.

I was about to mention the same thing - Apollo 10 vehicles were Charlie Brown and Snoopy. They didn't appear to make the patch, though. Apparently the crews managed to sneak one of the later vehicles as Casper (the Friendly Ghost) as well, even after they were explicitly told not to.

And now we have people like Elon Musk homaging The Culture while he does his business, and his PR is very loud. It does give the impression that these aren't just people who are passionate about space, but people who are passionate about space. And that's something that gets lost behind the contracts and red tape of government agencies.

[XB-70A]

Well, I'm a bit mixed on this subject, much more about the characters chosen than the concept of support from an editor, even if it's one of the handful top-editors, to re-open the peoples minds about space programs.

Then from a personal point of view I would have like 2000 A.D. much more than Marvel (cause, The Law).

 

Otherwise I remember to have read that Chuck Jones, creator of Wile Coyote, had drawn the patch of USN VA-36 Road Runners on request of the squadron when they switch to Skyhawks : 

 

 

I'm sure I've seen a Road Runner patch with the bird being orbited by electrons, but can't find it again...

[Bill Phil]

It's a cultural reference. Like how some Apollo spacecraft were named after Snoopy and Charlie Brown.

[razark]

The Astronaut Corps has an award that they give out to people "for outstanding performance, contributing to flight safety and mission success."

Spoiler

 

 

[legoclone09]

I don't care, if anything it's good because it gets more people interested in space.