• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

CAN Enhanced (Permanent?) Fwd Presence in Latvia

When the medium becomes the message, the content loses meaning.
Q What are you watching?
A I’m watching channel 6
Q Ok, but what? The news or I love Lucy?
A Who cares? It’s channel 6.
Fine, but if the means isn't modern, then noone is turning on channel 6 except the 40+ year olds who grew up with it. Sure, you'll lose conciseness in the messaging, but at least someone will be listening to it. Its not like th CAF does any other effective internal messaging anyways, this is the only means that's actually accessible beyond what the Chain of Command knows.
 
The medium is the message. And that is precisely why we are losing the ability to message and attract younger recruits.

My teenagers have grown up in a cable-free house since 2011. They don't read the newspaper or listen to the radio all that much.

Now YouTube, Instagram, SnapChat, and the like.... you have them hook line and sinker. The U.S. is looking into these mediums with intent.

Case in point:

U.S Army PsyOps E- Girl Hailey Lujan

This one Sgt PsyOps PA type has a large following on Instagram (350k) and YouTube (380K). Is it kind of beyond the pale? Yes. Does it hit the target audience? I would say so.

Do we need to go to these extremes? I would say not. The issue is that we have avoided these realms outside the "corporate" IO messaging. Most Gen Z/A are extremely media literate and don't buy the scripted message. They prefer the "influencer", as it appears more genuine (even if its the same message coming out of a different mouth).

The CA Podcast is a great start, but I think ADM(PA) needs a revamp of we're going to reach the youth of today in the spaces they are comfortable in.
 
I broadly agree with what you said regarding needing to branch out from the traditional means of reaching the audience we want, but I strongly disagree with this bit;

Most Gen Z/A are extremely media literate and don't buy the scripted message. They prefer the "influencer", as it appears more genuine (even if its the same message coming out of a different mouth).

I don't think they are more media literate, they just are illiterate in a different way than previous generations. Previous generations placed more weight on the guy/gal in a suit sitting at a desk telling them the "truth". The younger generations, including younger millennials, distrust the suits, but place a huge amount of trust in influencers that appear to be "authentic".

Both types of media can be used to spread lies/propagandize, and sadly it seems younger generations are just as unaware of this as the older generations were.
 
I don't think they are more media literate, they just are illiterate in a different way than previous generations. Previous generations placed more weight on the guy/gal in a suit sitting at a desk telling them the "truth". The younger generations, including younger millennials, distrust the suits, but place a huge amount of trust in influencers that appear to be "authentic".

Both types of media can be used to spread lies/propagandize, and sadly it seems younger generations are just as unaware of this as the older generations were.
Agreed. I was trying broadly to make the same point, but you worded it far better.
 
they just are illiterate in a different way than previous generations.
This!

I'm old enough to remember getting the news from Walter Cronkite. I've watched the media change over the years albeit slowly at the start and then becoming a gallop in the last two decades as internet took hold and rather than choosing your information from between three or four talking heads and two newspapers the choice exploded into hundreds of thousands of feeds.

The problem is that out of that mass of information the public chooses what's most gratifying to it, what offers the most confirmation bias and what is the most entertaining. Mostly that reaches out to the lowest common denominator of critical thought.

DND and the Army do have media channels that provide valuable information - the Army's website, Army Today, the Canadian Army Journal, and, until recently, the Canadian Military Journal, Canadian Defence Review, The Maple Leaf. There are hundreds of other websites that provide valuable defence information that, while not specific to Canada, is relevant to Canada. How much or how little one uses those sites is the question.

Frankly, I only follow a few sites, not because I'm old, but because they are all too often Johnny One Note affairs that basically offer the same message over and over again cleverly hidden amongst non-informative entertainment. (How many times have I turned out one more lengthy post on reserve restructuring on this site? - at least I don't put in images of scantily clad PA sergeants making pouty faces)

I'll readily agree with the fact that the traditional media sources (such as the Canadian Army Journal) do not reach the vast majority of those who should read it. I sometimes miss the old "Sentinel" that showed up every month in break rooms across the country and were pretty dogeared by the time the next issue came out. Pretty much everyone in the CAF saw and read the messaging of the month. Not so today. It's hard to find the message, if there is one.

I'll give you this: it's hard for the PA world to reach its target audience amongst a public (civilian and military) fleeting attention span that generally rejects "information" for "entertainment." While Hailey may have 350,000 followers, her message is "i am in the Armie and i like to play and laugh and have fun. i am normal." Beyond finding a few recruits who think that they'll be able to hook up in the "armie," what does this site accomplish?

Sometimes the problem is that there is entirely too much chaff flying around to even find what the message is. Throwing your message into the wind might make you feel like you are accomplishing something but unless you can point to measurable results that prove you are having an impact, you're just creating an insignificant activity. Walter - he had an impact.

🍻
 
This!

I'm old enough to remember getting the news from Walter Cronkite. I've watched the media change over the years albeit slowly at the start and then becoming a gallop in the last two decades as internet took hold and rather than choosing your information from between three or four talking heads and two newspapers the choice exploded into hundreds of thousands of feeds.

The problem is that out of that mass of information the public chooses what's most gratifying to it, what offers the most confirmation bias and what is the most entertaining. Mostly that reaches out to the lowest common denominator of critical thought.

DND and the Army do have media channels that provide valuable information - the Army's website, Army Today, the Canadian Army Journal, and, until recently, the Canadian Military Journal, Canadian Defence Review, The Maple Leaf. There are hundreds of other websites that provide valuable defence information that, while not specific to Canada, is relevant to Canada. How much or how little one uses those sites is the question.

Frankly, I only follow a few sites, not because I'm old, but because they are all too often Johnny One Note affairs that basically offer the same message over and over again cleverly hidden amongst non-informative entertainment. (How many times have I turned out one more lengthy post on reserve restructuring on this site? - at least I don't put in images of scantily clad PA sergeants making pouty faces)

I'll readily agree with the fact that the traditional media sources (such as the Canadian Army Journal) do not reach the vast majority of those who should read it. I sometimes miss the old "Sentinel" that showed up every month in break rooms across the country and were pretty dogeared by the time the next issue came out. Pretty much everyone in the CAF saw and read the messaging of the month. Not so today. It's hard to find the message, if there is one.

I'll give you this: it's hard for the PA world to reach its target audience amongst a public (civilian and military) fleeting attention span that generally rejects "information" for "entertainment." While Hailey may have 350,000 followers, her message is "i am in the Armie and i like to play and laugh and have fun. i am normal." Beyond finding a few recruits who think that they'll be able to hook up in the "armie," what does this site accomplish?

Sometimes the problem is that there is entirely too much chaff flying around to even find what the message is. Throwing your message into the wind might make you feel like you are accomplishing something but unless you can point to measurable results that prove you are having an impact, you're just creating an insignificant activity. Walter - he had an impact.

🍻

And then there's the self-inflicted wounds, that go viral in places like gigantic magazines with millions of subscribers, which should drive the CAF to managing their public image better or else the consequences might be enormous - but probably won't.

Congrats, we are an international media laughing stock ;)


The Canadian Army’s new camouflage moose logo comes amid recruiting problems​


It’s supposed to look like a new camo pattern, but one lawmaker said it looks like a bad game of Tetris.


Canada’s Army introduced a secondary logo that has people asking “How much did you pay for this?”
The logo is a detail from the Canadian Army’s new “Canadian disruptive pattern multi-terrain camouflage” in brown with a brown Canadian maple leaf. Online, people said it looked like a Lego moose or something from the video game Minecraft after the Canadian Army’s X account asked followers what they thought.

“I think it looks like the Army is saying it doesn’t know how to play Tetris,” wrote Goldie Chamari, a member of Ontario’s legislature.
In response to the blowback, the Canadian Army reassured followers it wasn’t dumping its longtime official logo, which shows three maple leaves connected at the stem in front of crossed swords under a royal crown.

“The Canadian Army has not changed its official logo,” the agency wrote on X. The icon launched today is a supplementary design only that will be used in the bottom left corner of certain communications products and in animations for videos.”

The new mark, along with the camouflage pattern and the tagline “Strong. Proud. Ready.” (or “Forts. Fiers. Prêts.” for our friends in Quebec) comes as the Canadian Army faces what Bill Blair, the country’s defense minister, described as a recruiting “death spiral.”

“Over the past three years, more people have left than have entered,” Blair told a conference in March. “We cannot afford to continue at that pace. We’ve got to do something differently.”

Something different includes a brand refresh. As in the U.S., Canadian military branches use heraldic-style marks for their armed forces. While these symbols are imbued with heritage and tradition—and as misunderstandings about the supplementary Canadian Army mark show, getting rid of them would not go over well—designers find that speaking to a new generation requires branding that looks more Call of Duty than coat of arms.

In the U.S., which is facing its own military recruitment struggles, military branches have introduced more contemporary secondary logos to complement their old-school official emblems.

The Army, for example, uses a seal showing an eagle holding arrows and olive branches in its talons, but it also has a contemporary star logo and wordmark that spells out “U.S. Army” in a custom sans-serif font. The brand was refreshed last year for a new “Be All You Can Be” recruiting campaign that Major General Alex Fink, chief of Army enterprise marketing, said was designed to reach young people.

“We know youth seek purpose, passion, community, and connection, but we also know many don’t recognize the Army’s ability to deliver on those needs,” Fink said in a statement. “We need a brand that effectively communicates the possibilities of Army service.”

The initial response to the Canadian Army’s secondary logo suggests it might not be as effective as that of its neighbors to the south, but according to Alex Tétreault, Department of National Defense senior communications adviser, at least the new mark didn’t come at the Canadian taxpayers’ expense.

“The icon was developed without additional funds or involvement of external companies,” Tétreault told Canada’s public broadcaster CBC. “It was developed by DND’s internal graphic design team, and this icon comes at zero expense to the taxpayer.”


 
This!

I'm old enough to remember getting the news from Walter Cronkite. I've watched the media change over the years albeit slowly at the start and then becoming a gallop in the last two decades as internet took hold and rather than choosing your information from between three or four talking heads and two newspapers the choice exploded into hundreds of thousands of feeds.

The problem is that out of that mass of information the public chooses what's most gratifying to it, what offers the most confirmation bias and what is the most entertaining. Mostly that reaches out to the lowest common denominator of critical thought.

DND and the Army do have media channels that provide valuable information - the Army's website, Army Today, the Canadian Army Journal, and, until recently, the Canadian Military Journal, Canadian Defence Review, The Maple Leaf. There are hundreds of other websites that provide valuable defence information that, while not specific to Canada, is relevant to Canada. How much or how little one uses those sites is the question.

Frankly, I only follow a few sites, not because I'm old, but because they are all too often Johnny One Note affairs that basically offer the same message over and over again cleverly hidden amongst non-informative entertainment. (How many times have I turned out one more lengthy post on reserve restructuring on this site? - at least I don't put in images of scantily clad PA sergeants making pouty faces)

I'll readily agree with the fact that the traditional media sources (such as the Canadian Army Journal) do not reach the vast majority of those who should read it. I sometimes miss the old "Sentinel" that showed up every month in break rooms across the country and were pretty dogeared by the time the next issue came out. Pretty much everyone in the CAF saw and read the messaging of the month. Not so today. It's hard to find the message, if there is one.

I'll give you this: it's hard for the PA world to reach its target audience amongst a public (civilian and military) fleeting attention span that generally rejects "information" for "entertainment." While Hailey may have 350,000 followers, her message is "i am in the Armie and i like to play and laugh and have fun. i am normal." Beyond finding a few recruits who think that they'll be able to hook up in the "armie," what does this site accomplish?

Sometimes the problem is that there is entirely too much chaff flying around to even find what the message is. Throwing your message into the wind might make you feel like you are accomplishing something but unless you can point to measurable results that prove you are having an impact, you're just creating an insignificant activity. Walter - he had an impact.

🍻
Growing up we had three newspapers delivered to the house. Monday through Friday we had the Ottawa Journal, until it died and we started taking the Citizen, and the Montreal Gazette which you could get home delivered in Ottawa. Needed that for the coverage the Habs and Expos. Sundays we had home delivery of the Toronto Star. Always listened to CBC Radio for the news and As It Happens. Today I still get the Citizen delivered and head into town every Sunday for the New York Times because I like the physical paper as I do books. But haven't watched TV news in years, or listened to radio news. And I work in communications.

The old model of organizations putting out news releases to be picked up and reported on by media outlets is on its last legs. When I started out there was an art to writing a release. It was a narrative and could go on for a couple of pages. Now they may be little more than a couple of paragraphs with a series of quotes tacked on at the end, if anything. As often as not, there's just a tweet with a link to some content on a website. Or a LinkedIn post with a fun graphic. Maybe something on TikTok or Instagram. The challenge is to know which vehicle the audience you're targeting is using today.

On the plus side, as often as not you're speaking directly to your audience without any mediation by the news media, offering critical or opposing views. That's obviously an advantage to any organization if you can figure out how to do it well. Not sure it's a societal advantage.

I miss my Sentinel collection. Had a complete set from first to last. And then my basement flooded...
 
The problem is that out of that mass of information the public chooses what's most gratifying to it, what offers the most confirmation bias and what is the most entertaining. Mostly that reaches out to the lowest common denominator of critical thought.
Which suggests a need to present a thousand genuine faces telling their, their unit's, and by extension the CAF's story, in an engaging and relatable way.
I'll readily agree with the fact that the traditional media sources (such as the Canadian Army Journal) do not reach the vast majority of those who should read it. I sometimes miss the old "Sentinel" that showed up every month in break rooms across the country and were pretty dogeared by the time the next issue came out. Pretty much everyone in the CAF saw and read the messaging of the month. Not so today. It's hard to find the message, if there is one.
There's definitely a gaping hole in place of the old mass-distribution internal material. While the CAF app and the online Maple Leaf have some utility, neither has the same impact. Even within the realm of that app, there's very little being done with it: that there's no feeds for the Maple Leaf or for service, branch, trade, base, journal, etc. news and articles, or even e.g. NAVGENs and the army and air force equivalents is a waste.

If the idea is to avoid the waste and effort associated with hardcopy newspapers, excellent: then send out emails on the same distribution cycle as the old papers, and use the app to push things out a little bit further. The ever-more-heavily algorithmic management of Facebook, Instagram, and Twitter has reduced users' ability to select "put this thing in front of my face ALWAYS" in various ways.
I'll give you this: it's hard for the PA world to reach its target audience amongst a public (civilian and military) fleeting attention span that generally rejects "information" for "entertainment." While Hailey may have 350,000 followers, her message is "i am in the Armie and i like to play and laugh and have fun. i am normal." Beyond finding a few recruits who think that they'll be able to hook up in the "armie," what does this site accomplish?
"Join us and get laid" has a certain resonance, as tacky as it might be.
Sometimes the problem is that there is entirely too much chaff flying around to even find what the message is. Throwing your message into the wind might make you feel like you are accomplishing something but unless you can point to measurable results that prove you are having an impact, you're just creating an insignificant activity.
Which requires a bit of a balance when a great deal of the current communications environment is built of thousands of effectively insignificant activities.

Less preciousness about various aspects of publicly-visible communications wouldn't hurt. More CAF members posting "check this cool **** out" on their private means wouldn't hurt, while on the official side, a noisier, more responsive, more useful presence might be helpful. Treat the UK MoD's Ukraine posts as an example.
 
The old model of organizations putting out news releases to be picked up and reported on by media outlets is on its last legs. When I started out there was an art to writing a release. It was a narrative and could go on for a couple of pages. Now they may be little more than a couple of paragraphs with a series of quotes tacked on at the end, if anything. As often as not, there's just a tweet with a link to some content on a website. Or a LinkedIn post with a fun graphic. Maybe something on TikTok or Instagram. The challenge is to know which vehicle the audience you're targeting is using today.
Almost feels like the older style of "release" needs to return, as the second step for everything that's not Instragram (would be lovely if they'd give up and allow links in post text...). Get all the material about whatever in the same place, either within the page or one click deep. Might take a little while to build out, but create a DND/CAF online presence that encourages people to run down Wikipedia-style rabbit holes.
 
When the medium becomes the message, the content loses meaning.
Q What are you watching?
A I’m watching channel 6
Q Ok, but what? The news or I love Lucy?
A Who cares? It’s channel 6.
This isn’t about “the medium is the message.” This is knowing your audience to tailor and direct your message to them.

If your audience is not getting your message because you keep paying to put it in print newspaper but they are all watching channel 6, that is your failure.

And if you need to engage 20 year-old who don’t care to stream curated content from the Channel 6 website, then you need to find something other than that as well.
 
I think that this is now what the job of PA has to be. Find the channels that connect with the target audience be it the potential recruit or the serving member and push the selected message to them. Then audit the success or failure of that and adjust accordingly.

Interesting static websites couped to search engines still do a decent job so long as the information is readily available. The government of Canada web site's search engine is the worst possible tool available.

🍻
 
I think that this is now what the job of PA has to be. Find the channels that connect with the target audience be it the potential recruit or the serving member and push the selected message to them. Then audit the success or failure of that and adjust accordingly.

Interesting static websites couped to search engines still do a decent job so long as the information is readily available. The government of Canada web site's search engine is the worst possible tool available.

🍻
The problem being exactly this - younger generations are less likely to trust the source if they are obviously the PAFO.

The best CAF content creators are not, and frankly cannot be, PAFOs. The Pilot project and Canadian Army pod casts are pretty good while the worst instagram account going is the Canadian Army one.
 
The best CAF content creators are not, and frankly cannot be, PAFOs.
Time for a split within the trade? A "promotion and communication facilitator" stream to support (not control, notably) non-PAff people in getting their word (images, videos, whatever) to the world and to handle the non-reactive (or non-crisis, at least) side of things (backgrounders, website content, probably most press releases), and a "crisis/base talking head/sacrificial goat/journalist interface" stream.
 
The content created by our official sources has very limited reach. Some if it can be quite good, but it is questionable how many people outside the CAF circle (ie serving members, families, veterans, etc) actually engage with it.

The Canadian Amy's official Youtube channel is 16 years old, has 34K subscribers and just over 1.3 million total views. Note that the number of subscribers is probably fewer than the number of people who have served in the Army over the last 16 years.

Matsimus, a reservist from Alberta, has been running his channel for about half as long, but he has 418K subscribers and more than 132 million views.

Do we do enough to reinforce success and encourage these individual content creators? My gut tells me that we are more likely to threaten them with punishment if they get too close to violating QR&O 19.14.

 
Time for a split within the trade? A "promotion and communication facilitator" stream to support (not control, notably) non-PAff people in getting their word (images, videos, whatever) to the world and to handle the non-reactive (or non-crisis, at least) side of things (backgrounders, website content, probably most press releases), and a "crisis/base talking head/sacrificial goat/journalist interface" stream.
No because as has been said above much better than I could phrase it, the key to content is perception of authenticity. Being employed as a PAFO immediately erodes that.

Gen Z or what ever we call them now doesn’t want to listen to the suit being a desk tell them how the world is.
 
No because as has been said above much better than I could phrase it, the key to content is perception of authenticity. Being employed as a PAFO immediately erodes that.

Gen Z or what ever we call them now doesn’t want to listen to the suit being a desk tell them how the world is.
Gen X never has…
 
No because as has been said above much better than I could phrase it, the key to content is perception of authenticity. Being employed as a PAFO immediately erodes that.

Gen Z or what ever we call them now doesn’t want to listen to the suit being a desk tell them how the world is.

Fortunately alot of research has gone into understanding (how to sell stuff to) this demographic.... one example:

1715782243226.png

 
No because as has been said above much better than I could phrase it, the key to content is perception of authenticity. Being employed as a PAFO immediately erodes that.

Gen Z or what ever we call them now doesn’t want to listen to the suit being a desk tell them how the world is.
Was thinking of providing support to the not-PAFOs, on top of carrying on the "sell the CAF" and film/video creation work, and having that group separate from the one whose members get to deal with the fallout when S2 Bloggins posts something obnoxious.
 
Was thinking of providing support to the not-PAFOs, on top of carrying on the "sell the CAF" and film/video creation work, and having that group separate from the one whose members get to deal with the fallout when S2 Bloggins posts something obnoxious.

It's almost as if there is no coherent marketing strategy, led from the top and consistently executed all the way down the line...

Thinking Think GIF by Adult Swim
 
Back
Top