The Army is Confused....
BLOG BY DAVE CHEN
During the past Veterans' Day weekend, the US Army changed its long running slogan of "An Army of One" to "Army Strong". In the current campaign, the ad shows parents being worried about their child being in the army and facing the almost-definite chance of deployment; the ad ended with the main tag line: "You made them strong; We'll make them Army Strong"
Personally, I thought this completely altered the Army's core meaning. Granted, although EVERYONE knows that when you're in the army, you life is in the hands of your commanders, the "An Army of One" ads seemed to suggest a certain degree of individuality. After years of airing ads showing a single soldier battling wars or harsh conditions, the concept of "An Army of One" (launched Jan 2001) and the nuanced idea of individualism is deeply engrained in the public's mind. In a Boston.com article, "Loren Thompson, a defense analyst at the Lexington Institute research group, said the previous slogan seemed to promote the notion that you could join the Army and preserve your individuality. 'If you want to be an `Army of One' you probably want to join the Hell's Angels, not the U.S. Army,'"
I think the new $1billion "Army Strong" campagin is a poorly thought out campaign despite the high effectiveness testing results because the master brand of US Army is altering its core meaning that it's conveying. With the new "Army Strong" campaign, the Army is almost communicating the idea of once a parent's child is in the army's hands, they relinquish control of their child's life. This is a sharp contrast with the previous campaign that was a softer pitch that still allowed recruits to retain their individuality.
Also, the US Army is one of the most powerful organizations in the world, and it seems rather fickle for them to change the slogan that the public associates the Army with after a short 5 years.
1 Comments:
Yeah, Dave, I mostly agree with you. The campaign was not well thought out. However, the Army of One campaign itself was flawed from the getgo because of this notion that one soldier can change the course of history. However, the idea that individual strength is eternal when fighting for your country is what made the US Army campaign so successful.
Now, they are just trying to get some extra feet on the battlefield. There is no more singularity of courage. It's a team effort, and I think that THIS idea was what should have been focused over individuality. I personally am not pro-war, so I have a cynical bias towards the army and war in general.
I think the message they are trying to put out there is that you can acquire strength in many ways, but only in the Army can you acquire the courage to fight for what you beleive in. Inappropriate? I think so. Good call Dave.
-Alex Zucker
Post a Comment
<< Home