Page images
PDF
EPUB

the cost of the program? I assume if you buy Harry James, it would cost a little more than if you asked the Singing Sergeants, somebody in the higher places asked the Singing Sergeants to record something?

Mr. WOLLSTADT. We will do our best to achieve comparability in the estimates and by "we" I mean the Office of the Secretary of Defense will try to make the analysis comparable.

(The following information was received for the record :)

COST OF PRODUCING ADVERTISING SPOTS USED IN PUBLIC SERVICE TIME TV AND RADIO

Fiscal year Fiscal year

1970 1971 estimate

Army.
Navy.
Marine Corps.
Air Force..

$203, 156
457,920

95, 750
443, 000

$1,019,000

239, 800 169, 075 408,000

The above costs are not comparable between services; and for the Army and Marine Corps, the costs are not comparable from FY 1970 to FY 1971. The reasons are:

1. The Army FY 1971 costs are for advertising spots which are being produced for both public service and paid broadcasting. The FY 1971 amount shown above does exclude the cost of producing spots used solely on paid broadcasting time. For the paid TV/radio test there are also talent residual charges and network integration charges.

2. In FY 1970, the Marine Corps produced their advertising spots in-house, therefore they did not include the cost of Marine camera crews, film and prints. In FY 1971 the Marine Corps shifted to a commercial source.

3. The Navy and Air Force amounts exclude the cost of service camera crews when used, and the cost of prints.

Mr. BROWN. All right, sir, the other question I would like to ask you is, Have you done any analysis on the costing out of the current methods or recently used methods of recruiting versus the results, compared to the results which you seem to feel that you are getting from this method of recruiting? That is the first question.

Do you understand what I ask!
Mr. WOLLSTADT. I guess I don't, I am sorry.

Mr. Brown. Could you tell me what it cost the service now to get any of the branches of the service, that is, to get a recruit sworn in!

Mr. WOLLSTADT. I can't tell you. I think perhaps each of the services here could speak to that point. I think there will be variations because in some cases you require a higher percentage of more sophisticated people, so the

services are not uniform in that respect. Mr. Brown. I would assume each service has some judgment as to who gets the more sophisticated people, but, Admiral, do you have specific figures ?

Admiral GREENE. For the Navy, currently the cost is about $435 per enlistee this spring.

Mr. BROWN. Did the Marines or Air Force have comparable figures ?

General Kidd. I don't have one available. I will be happy to supply it for the record. (See p. 43.)

Mr. BROWN. Are these based also on the same method of evaluation of costs?

Mr. WOLLSTADT. We will try to assure you that they are.

Mr. Brown. You know, in the post office building where my office is located, each of the services has a little free space and I don't know if somebody has to clean that space and light it, and so on, and I am curious whether it is included in all of these figures or not included or what?

Admiral GREENE. We figure the salaries for civilians and pay for our military recruiters and overhead expense and advertising costs, that all goes into the $435 per enlistee.

Mr. Brown. And the free programing ?
Admiral GREENE. Yes.
Mr. BROWN. Do the Marines have any comment there?

General BECKINGTON. We do have the same figure. I don't have it here at my fingertips, and will supply it. I think we use the same costing method that Admiral Greene just related to you.

All I know is really it keeps going up actually, the cost of recruiting service as measured by the cost per recruit actually enlisted. (The following table was received for the record :)

Cost PER ENLISTED RECRUIT (ACTIVE FORCES)
Estimate for fiscal year 1971:
Army-

$434 Navy

358 Marine Corps.

387 Air Force.

327 Mr. Brown. All right. It occurs to me again the way to assess whether you rely on the media for free time as opposed to paid-for time and everything relates to how much you put into creation of that free time versus paid-for time and it all relates to whether you are getting better results one way or the other. Admiral GREENE. The Navy's costs are based on free advertising

Mr. Brown. I understand they are, but that advertising is not totally free to the Navy; in other words, it cost the Navy something to put together the programs sent out to the media ?

Admiral GREENE. Yes.

Mr. BROWN. All right. What about the provision of free material to other media in the jurisdictional area, as the licensed media, but this question is as to newspapers, magazines, billboards, and is their material provided free to these people and to what extent is it used and how does the cost of provision of that material relate to its use?

Mr. WOLLSTADT. In connection with printed media there are differences among the services. The Army and the Air Force do use paid advertising and have for a good many years. I think last year the Army spent $2 million.

Mr. KESTER. $1.7 million. Mr. WOLLSTADT. $1.7 million primarily for magazine advertising. The Navy does not use paid advertising and I am not sure about the Marine Corps, but I think the Marine Corps does not.

General BECKINGTON. We have a very small amount of money for paid advertising, Mr. Brown. This year it is in the neighborhood of $25,000, this fiscal year we are in now. It is almost entirely, and I believe really I can say "entirely," used in college newspapers to essentially place a very small ad that announces the date of the

all the way.

planned visit of what we call our "officer selection officers," the ones who visit the campuses and seek to interest young men in our Marine officer program.

Mr. Brown. It would be helpful, I think, if we could get that information, General.

(The following information was received for the record :) Cost OF PRODUCING PUBLIC SERVICE RECRUITING ADVERTISING IN PRINT MEDIA The advertising material is provided free to the newspapers, magazines and billboard operators. The cost of producing the advertising material is as follows:

[blocks in formation]

1 Newspaper only. Army and Air Force received no public service magazine space.

The estimated use of the material prepared for public service space is as follows:

Army. Public service space was provided in over 400 small-town newspapers in FY 1970. During FY 1971, 603 newspapers published public service ads or recruiting information columns. During FY 1970, 8,400 billboard posters were displayed. For FY 1970 to date, about 3,000 billboard posters were displayed. Army has no dollar estimate of the value of the public service space in newspapers and billboards.

Navy.The estimated value of the public service space is:

[blocks in formation]

Marine Corps.--The estimated value of public service space is :

Fiscal year

1970

Fiscal year

1971

Newspapers.
Magazines.
Billboards.

$1,520,000

10,000 3,000,000

$1,700,000

10.000 3,100,000

Air Force --Not known.

Mr. Brown. Did you have a comment, Admiral, about the Air Force?

General KIDD. Yes, sir, this fiscal year the Air Force is spending $501,000 for paid periodical advertising. This, however, covers å rather wide spectrum of customers and includes Air Force Academy

advertising, Reserve Forces, ROTC, career motivation projects, medical programs, and so forth, so it is not all directed at recruits.

A breakout directed specifically 'at recruits would probably be about 60 percent of that sum.

Mr. BROWN. One final question, because I do not want to take any more time and see that the other members have time to ask questions, but it is related to this question of other media. I see an ad for the Marines on the billboard and I assume that is provided free?

General BECKINGTON. Yes.

Mr. Brown. And if there is anything else to fill the billboard with, they put a picture of the Marine in dress uniform on there and say, "Join the Marines.” And what is likely to be the result for the Army or anybody else when the billboard people feel that the television and radio people are being paid and now I understand what you are saying is that the magazines get some dollar budget in paid advertising and are we likely to have that Marine ad replaced by something for bonds or trash on the highway or something like that?

Do you have any thought on it and could you tell me what the situation is with reference to newspapers ?

Mr. WOLLSTADT, That certainly is a possibility and it is one of the things we will look at in the evaluation. As far as we know, the fact that the Army and Air Force have spent some money in the printed media has not been a handicap up to this point to the Navy and Marine Corps. When you are talking about competing media, this could be different and it is one of the things that, very frankly, we need to look at.

Mr. Chairman, I have one point I would like to make clear. As far as the Office of the Secretary of Defense is concerned, we have no preconceived notion as to whether this test is going to show that we should go forward with paid TV or radio advertising, increase it, or decrease it. We expect to make an analysis just as objective as we can, and it is one we know we are going to have to defend before both of the Armed Services Committees and probably both of the Appropriations Subcommittees in order to get the money to carry it out. I would like to assure you we have not made up our mind in advance.

Mr. MACDONALD. Thank you, Mr. Brown.
Mr. Tiernan.
Mr. TIERNAN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. Wollstadt, do your records indicate whether Army recruits come in greater number proportionately from the rural areas than from urban areas or is it the other way around!

Mr. WOLLSTADT. I don't have it. Perhaps someone from the Department of the Army might have it.

Mr. TIERNAN. I understand you are Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Manpower, Research, and Utilization, is that correct?

Mr. WOLLSTADT. Yes.
Mr. TIERNAN. Does anyone with you have the figures ?
Mr. KESTER. We can supply them broken down, urban versus rural.
Mr. TIERNAN. You have the information!
Mr. KESTER. Yes, sir.

62-004–71

(The following information was received for the record :)

SOURCE OF ARMY RECRUITS, URBAN-RURAL* Current statistics on the urban-rural source of Army recruits are kept only for those who enlist for the Infantry, Armor and Artillery. For this group 67 percent came from urban areas and 33 percent from rural areas. These enlistments, however, represent only a small portion of total Army enlistments and may not be representative.

Mr. TIERNAN. Was that information utilized in the scheduling of the programs?

Mr. KESTER. Yes, it was. Mr. TuERNAN. By you or by the advertising agency? Mr. KESTER. By the advertising agency at our behest. Mr. TIERNAN. Is this project is this test run or being run by the advertising agency that generally handles your recruitment program?

Mr. KESTER. Yes, sir.

Mr. TIERNAN. And they have handled your program for how long a period ?

Mr. KESTER. Since fiscal year 1968.

Mr. TIERNAN. And it has been the least effective of all of the seryices in producing manpower, is that correct?

Mr. RESTER. Well, I don't think you can take that to be a point of the program.

Mr. TIERNAN. Are there many other agencies?
Mr. KESTER. Many other agencies, all of the leading agencies.

Mr. TIERNAN. This is the agency that handles advertising for the Army?

Mr. KESTER. That is correct.

Mr. TIERNAN. Would you supply for the record how long they handled the advertising I ask the same question of all the other services. The Marine Corps has used the Thompson agency, I understand. Would the other services supply for the record the advertising agency and dates and how long a period. (The following information was received for the record :)

[blocks in formation]

Mr. TIERNAN. Now, from the testimony, your statement, you indicate you have received in the last year $6 million of free time, is that correct?

Mr. WOLLSTADT. The Army? Mr. TIERNAN. I say the Army has received that. Mr. KESTER. Putting a value on it is somewhat arbitrary. *Rural areas are defined as towns with less than 5,000 ppoulation and farms, rancher, etc.

« PreviousContinue »