The New Face of Military Advertising: Behind the Army of One

by Harold Jordan

The armed services have kicked off major new advertising campaigns in the past year. This new breed of ad focuses on the services’ alleged contributions to the personal development of young people. The ads deliver messages that emphasize the intangible benefits of military service – an approach known as "values-based advertising" – in an attempt to get young people to identify even more strongly with particular branches of the military. Few explicit images of military weaponry are presented up-front in most of these ads.

The services have invested heavily in these ads: the Pentagon (read: the taxpayers) spent a record amount on advertising and recruiting costs in 2000, about $11,000 per recruit. (The full cost of recruiting and sending each new recruit to basic training is about $40,000.) The new advertising campaigns have several influences: various experimental programs that were conducted in the 90s; recent outside evaluations of the strengths and weaknesses of traditional military advertising programs; assessments of trends in the youth market; and a growing awareness of the significance of the internet.

A Post-Gulf War Crisis

The new breed of ad, while in some regards a radical departure from the military advertisements of the 1980s – which developed the theme "Be All You Can Be" and sold the military largely as a place to go for college money – represents more of a gradual evolution underway since the Gulf War. At the end of the Gulf War, the services recognized that the military could no longer be presented as a place where one received money for training and education, but never went to war, as it had been sold for the previous fifteen years. At the same time, presenting the war-fighting aspect of the military was the last thing the services wanted to do.

The deployment of 600,000 service members to the Gulf, including the call-up of more than 200,000 reservists, served as a stark reminder to young people and their loved ones that being in the military is about more than getting benefits. Continued revelations about health hazards faced by service members, most notably "Gulf War Syndrome," and government indifference and stonewalling have also hurt the recruiting effort. The challenge of the 1990s was to figure out a strategy for overcoming this public perception of the military.

In the 1990s, the Army settled on an approach that emphasized leadership development combined with technical skills. Military images (such as the uniform and military equipment) still figured into the equation, but they were presented increasingly as props for a demonstration of the intangible benefits of serving. For example, ads showing soldiers using military equipment in the field were accompanied by messages about leadership, presumably transferable to the civilian world. The military was presented as a junior MBA training program.

In the late 1990s, the Army developed its "Taking Charge" program, a more modest effort to present the military as solely a leadership, drug prevention, and "get your life together" experience. Stylistically these materials seemed adult-oriented. What was most striking about the "Taking Charge" resources (print and video) is that Army sponsorship is largely hidden. Rather the materials were used in contexts in which Army representatives were present or they were supplemented by other explicitly Army materials.

The Marines developed a visually striking series of ads that played heavily on the themes of bravery and pride and their contribution to self-development.

Perhaps the two most significant developments in military recruitment at the end of the decade were the expansion of niche marketing aimed principally at Latino communities and a commitment to using the web as a recruiting tool.

Beginning in 1998, the services made a major commitment to developing their web sites to support recruitment. Not only were the sites upgraded to include interactive features (chat with a recruiter, etc.), the military also invested heavily in advertising and planting "news" stories on youth-oriented web sites. The Army’s link with Channel One, a commercial enterprise that places a daily "news" satellite feed into tens of thousands of classrooms nationwide and maintains a "news" web site for young people, has been very controversial. (See "Channel One Garners New Criticism For Link to Advertiser on Web Site," New York Times (CyberTimes), March 16, 1997.)

Enlistment shortfalls developed despite these efforts. The enlistment shortfalls announced in the fall of 1999 – three of the four main service branches failed to meet their goals – brought things to a head. A new approach would be needed.

The "Army of One" to the Rescue

The newest ads have taken elements of these 1990s programs and moved them a step further. The emphasis on the intangible benefits of military service is made in a way that is more direct and personal, one that plays on the theme of individualism.

Receiving most of the attention have been the Army’s ads. The new Army advertising campaign is really two campaigns:

1. "Stay in School" Campaign

In the Fall of 2000, the Army launched a "stay in school" values-based campaign, a three-year $6 million effort. These ads were developed and run as Public Service Announcements with the help of the Advertising Council and Publics ad agency, which provided free assistance. This campaign, aimed at middle school youth (12-14 years of age), presents young people who are making decisions about their lives, not those who claim to be speaking as representatives of the military. Indeed, the new Army ads show young people in civilian, not military, clothing. Typically mention of the military occurs near the end of the audio-visuals.

2. "Army of One" Campaign

This new advertising campaign debuted in January of 2001 with television ads, new print materials, a new web site, and a new logo at a tab of $150 million in the first year alone. In the ads, soldiers tell stories of how they have grown as individuals in the Army, and of how the Army has respected their individuality. A consistent look and feel had been developed for all of the recruiters’ communications tools (print resources, web site, etc.) Spearheading this effort is the Chicago-based advertising firm of Leo Burnett, which counts Disney, Coca-Cola, and McDonalds as clients. The agency has subcontracted with two minority-owned advertisers, Cartel Creativo (for Latino-focused ads) and IMAGE USA (focusing on marketing to African-Americans).

The ads are in dull earth tones, not the traditional Army green. The logo is designed to create a new symbol that the Army hopes will blend into youth popular culture by being reproduced on commercial items such as clothing and gear. The web site is interactive, making use of video clips and audio interviews with soldiers. The print materials place heavy emphasis on getting young people to identify the names and contact information of other young people who might be recruited and provides young people with a special form designed for that purpose. Also significant is the placement of the ads: they appear in television shows such as Friends, The Simpsons, Buffy the Vampire Slayer, Comedy Central, and MTV, in People magazine, and on Channel One.

Of course, things don’t always turn out the way advertisers hope. The Army dropped its ads on Survivor in favor of the XFL (Xtreme Football League). The latter show turned out to be a ratings nightmare, prompting some critics of the advertising industry to observe that the Army’s decision gives new meaning to "Army of One" – the one person who appears to have watched the XFL.

The Navy and the Air Force have also launched their own major new advertising campaigns. While less dramatic than the Army’s campaign, they do represent a significant increase in the overall advertising effort. Coming this summer (2001) is a new Air Force initiative which promotes that branch as the "smart service" and the one branch whose mission is to be always "one step ahead." The idea is that the future is uncertain, whether for national security or other reasons, but the Air Force is always thinking ahead. The Air Force is spending $350 million -- $50 million per year for seven years – to develop this campaign. GSD&M, a Texas-based firm known mostly for its work in that region of the country, has been retained. Ads will be placed on MTV, Comedy Central, and Black Entertainment Television, as opposed to sports shows.

Finally, the five service branches (including the Coast Guard), have developed a new joint-service campaign focused on family themes. These ads now appear in mass-circulation adult publications (Time, Ebony, Sports Illustrated, and People magazines).

The new advertising campaigns have been introduced with great fanfare. They have been met with considerable skepticism by many who have military experience. The ads are fundamentally deceptive in that they present an inaccurate view of military life. Contrary to the claims of recruiting and advertising agency officials, the ads do not speak to the genuine fears held by many youth about the dehumanization associated with military life. Young people are more concerned about the regimentation, lack of control over decisions about daily life, excessive authoritarianism, and forced uniformity of military life.

The ads represent a new form of commercial manipulation of young people. In the end, this approach may work for the Marines, because of its relatively small size and peculiar (elite) appeal, but not for the other service branches. The military’s strategy seems to be to get more people to view and talk about the military by gaining publicity for the novelty of the advertising approach, rather than discussing the realties of military service.

About the Author

Harold Jordan coordinates the American Friends Service Committee's National Youth and Militarism Program. He can be reached at youthmil@afsc.org.

issues | activism | making choices | for the media | magazine | resources
military in schools | new face of military ads | selling of the "individual" | school: teach or sell? | this month's resource
about us | site map | FAQs | contact us | new features | Y&M home | Peacebuilding Programs | AFSC home

© American Friends Service Committee · National Youth & Militarism Program 1998, 1999, 2000, 2001.