NASA Public Relations, Reversed

In Particle Physics we often look with envy at NASA. In most cases they do an amazing job at PR (compare NASA’s home page and Fermilab’s). They have beautiful presentations, their web sites are accessible to non-scientists. There are few branches of science that do out reach so well. A friend of mine has mentioned that any grant funded by NASA has a mandated set-aside for web sites and other public presentations. After all, they, like us, are spending public money. They take the task of educating the public more seriously than we in particle physics do. It isn’t that we don’t take it seriously, it is just that they have it down to a science.

The PR organizations surrounding NASA are large, well funded, and full of people who are trained in presenting complex issues to the public (a skill that takes years to acquire). In particle physics it is often the physicists that are doing the PR. We put together web sites, “English language summaries, etc.” — but, lets be real. Not as good.

But there is a potential disadvantage, as I learned reading this New York Times article. The PR organization in NASA is large, and well organized. As a result, it turns out, a perfect place to put political appointees to monitor and affect the flow of information:

In October, for example, George Deutsch, a presidential appointee in NASA headquarters, told a Web designer working for the agency to add the word “theory” after every mention of the Big Bang, according to an e-mail message from Mr. Deutsch that another NASA employee forwarded to The Times.

Deutsch is a 24 year old graduate of political science from A&M (full disclosure: I went to UT Austin; we despise A&M It is a Texas football thing…). The article goes into more detail further on; Deutsch’s email makes it clear this is a religious issue connected with the intelligent design flap. Another incident is also described having to do with global warming.

In some ways, I’m glad the work I do isn’t visible to the public. The work I do does get at the heart of how the universe was created — but the loosely organized structure and the fact that we aren’t as publicly visible helps us here (frankly, I’d rather have NASA’s PR problems than a lack of public knowledge).

On a slightly different topic, I’ve noticed a lot of articles like this in recent days. The reason is, I think, obvious. Bush is trying to become the science president (at least for 10 minutes in the state of the union address!). Because of numerous past incidents (like this) he never will, and the press is (rightly) trying to hold him to facts and prevent him from re-writing history.

UPDATE: Another blogger used the ‘NET for research and found some of Deutsch’s old Texas A&M news columns. They are quite something to read!