News Article: Paid Patriotism

[Victorious Secret]

http://www.si.com/nhl/2015/11/04/nhl-defense-department-spending-scandal

The joint oversight report, entitled “Tackling Paid Patriotism,†focused mainly on deals between the U.S. Department of Defense and the NFL. It did, however, name six NHL teams that it says accepted “paid patriotism†funds from various arms of the DOD in the fiscal years 2012 to ’14:

• Boston Bruins: $280,000

• Carolina Hurricanes: $75,000

• Dallas Stars: $34,000

• Detroit Red Wings: $41,500

• Florida Panthers: $40,000

• Minnesota Wild: $570,000

Didn't know where to put this so I made a thread. If a mod feels its more necessary in another thread, please do so.

Good article. All in all disappointing that any sort of heartwarming display is manufactured unless its an unscripted on the ice moment.

Along with their bumbling Sydor escapade, this is another dark spot on the organization. Depends on the person how big they interpret that spot, but it is nonetheless disconcerting. I don't like it.

Click to read more...

 

[Nharris31]

Here's another article with comments from the Wild http://sports.yahoo.com/blogs/nhl-p...in--pay-for-patriotism--report-230530680.html

 

[Hall of Faber]

Wow. Remember when they skipped a TV timeout last year for a solider coming home??

I guess they make up for that loss in ad revenue...

 

[57special]

Don't know who I'm madder at, the DOD or the Wild.

 

[Minnesota]

So the organization shouldn't accept money from the government to help them with military recruiting/advertising? Sounds like we're treating them like any other advertiser. When they say these funds are coming out of 'taxpayer pockets', they mean it's actually coming from the government who is choosing to spend these funds with sports organizations to recruit/advertise. Don't see how you can blame any organization for that. Are you going to guilt-trip a television network for accepting 'taxpayer dollars' from the government to air military commercials? No. Do we expect them to advertise those commercials for free? No.

• Opportunities for a soldier to deliver the puck at the start of home games.

• Featured soldier presentation and live recognition.

• On-ice swearing-in ceremonies.

• Pregame chalk talk with management and coaches.

• Opportunity to perform the national anthem.

I'm trying to figure out the motivation of this article...

A) Not allow the government to advertise/recruit for the military during sporting events?

or

B) Allow the government to advertise/recruit for the military during sporting events... But for free?

The report states that the Pentagon is discontinuing the practice of paying for patriotic displays at games and events, and that the NFL “has called on all clubs to stop accepting payment for patriotic salutes.â€

Good - That kind of solves the 'issue', no? The government won't be forcing taxpayers to pay for these faux patriotic displays/advertising campaigns anymore. If a sports organization really, truly wants to support the military, they will eat the cost.

 

[57special]

I think the point is that the mercenary aspects of this arrangement were in no way made clear to fans and media, but rather kept quiet. This was not a heartfelt tribute for vets by the Wild, but a show put on to cram taxpayer $$ in their pockets.

 

[Minnesota]

I think the point is that the mercenary aspects of this arrangement were in no way made clear to fans and media, but rather kept quiet. This was not a heartfelt tribute for vets by the Wild, but a show put on to cram taxpayer $$ in their pockets.

I hate that they use the term 'taxpayer dollars.' Rhetorical question: When has anybody ever 100% supported how the government uses tax funds? If they weren't spending that money to advertise with sports teams, they'd be spending it to benefit the military elsewhere.

The Wild organization is a business who will take money from (practically) anyone to support a cause. Breast Cancer Awareness, Men's Health (Movember), etc. are all paid advertising campaigns. Heck, check out NHL.com right now - it's skinned to support Hockey Fights Cancer - a cause they're likely being paid to support.

However, I agree the NHL and DOD should probably have been more transparent about their relationship. It's easy to see why people would see them as partners, rather than a business transaction.

 

[hirawl]

Oh the hypocracy in the US. C'mon.

 

[00xtremeninja]

so THAT'S how they got that new scoreboard!!!!!

 

[Ban Hammered]

There are worse things to be outraged about. If the practice is ending then much ado about nothing.

 

[Dr Jan Itor]

so THAT'S how they got that new scoreboard!!!!!

Worth it.

 

[BagHead]

Kind of with Minnesota here. I don't see anything wrong with it. I actually kind of like it. It sounds like the military and the Wild have a contract in which the Wild advertise for the military to boost recruitment and the military pays the Wild for that service. Seems reasonable enough to me.

 

[Avder]

Kind of with Minnesota here. I don't see anything wrong with it. I actually kind of like it. It sounds like the military and the Wild have a contract in which the Wild advertise for the military to boost recruitment and the military pays the Wild for that service. Seems reasonable enough to me.

I'd have no problem with regular ads for recruiting and events that are based around that. But to be paid to pay tribute to wounded soldiers, who should be paid tribute to for free, sickens me just a little.

 

[Wild48]

End it all. We don't need to ram patriotism down everybody's throat at every game.

 

[Victorious Secret]

I hate that they use the term 'taxpayer dollars.' Rhetorical question: When has anybody ever 100% supported how the government uses tax funds? If they weren't spending that money to advertise with sports teams, they'd be spending it to benefit the military elsewhere.

The Wild organization is a business who will take money from (practically) anyone to support a cause. Breast Cancer Awareness, Men's Health (Movember), etc. are all paid advertising campaigns. Heck, check out NHL.com right now - it's skinned to support Hockey Fights Cancer - a cause they're likely being paid to support.

However, I agree the NHL and DOD should probably have been more transparent about their relationship. It's easy to see why people would see them as partners, rather than a business transaction.

To be fair, awareness campaigns are like hashtags, 99.9% for show.

And just because the money would be spend on the military advertising, doesn't mean it should. We already have the largest volunteer armed force in the entire world.

 

[thestonedkoala]

I'd have no problem with regular ads for recruiting and events that are based around that. But to be paid to pay tribute to wounded soldiers, who should be paid tribute to for free, sickens me just a little.

Nail + head. It's fine if they used it for recruiting or events, but for tribute? Yeah. That's not good juju.

 

[Uberdachen]

The thing that I find galling is that Count Chocula obviously doesn't care enough to be the high bidder and get to drop the puck.

 

[BagHead]

Paying tribute and advertising are not all that different, it's just that one of those things usually comes free. Clearly the DOD decided that organic-looking tribute would work better to get impressionable 18 year olds into the service than ramming traditional marketing ads down their throat.

Now, if we want to get into the "should?" of it, that's a different argument. Nothing illegal was done (as far as I'm aware), so it's fine in that respect. As for "should", I really am not a military guy. I respect servicemen for what they've gone through and done (heck, my grandfather was a POW in WWII and I respect the h.e.double hockey sticks out of him), but military spending is already out of control. I'm glad to see this stop.

 

[nickschultzfan]

I'm confused, am I supposed to be upset about this?

Department of Defense pays for advertising. Wild provide that advertising. How is this any different than commercials on TV or in the movie theater?

I don't like it, but the US government blows trillions of dollars on far worst crap that does far more damage to society.

Maybe I've just become desensitized.

 

[iLLogik87]

It doesnt really bother me.

 

[00xtremeninja]

I'm confused, am I supposed to be upset about this?

Department of Defense pays for advertising. Wild provide that advertising. How is this any different than commercials on TV or in the movie theater?

I don't like it, but the US government blows trillions of dollars on far worst crap that does far more damage to society.

Maybe I've just become desensitized.

I don't think that most people have an issue with advertising for recruitment purposes, but more so how every time you go to a game, there is a veteran that is honored in a suite with his/her family. This is all well and good, however, the government paying sports organizations to make the honor and put the spotlight on these individuals is where it is maddening. As Avder said, honoring people who served overseas is something patriotic people should do naturally and our support shouldn't be bought by Uncle Sam.

It's deceiving too, until seeing this come out about NFL teams and now NHL, I always went to the game thinking the organization was awesome about honoring MN vets and do it out of the kindness of their hearts, but much like finding out that Santa isn't real, it makes the whole showing kind of MEH.

 

[Minnesota]

Russo tweeting about Paid Patriotism:

[COLLAPSE=69]

[/COLLAPSE]

tl;dr: This type of advertising has been in the military's budget for years. It's no different than any other advertiser paying sports teams for rights to advertise. It's long been known that National Guard has been MN Wild sponsor.

I don't think many people thoughts all these sports teams were honoring the military because they believe in supporting 'murrica and patriotism. It's always been about the money, hunny.

 

[Generic User]

I was never under the impression that the DOD was getting free advertising.. And if they were, THAT'S what I would be mad about.. Not that they have to pay for it. Like others have said, get mad about how your tax dollars are allocated.

 

[Jarick]

I'm not surprised, but I think it's disingenuous of the team and insulting to fans to accept money to honor veterans for the purpose of recruiting.

Right after 9/11, it seemed heartfelt and natural to take extra time to remember and honor vets. But as the years wear on, the words seem emptier and lose their meaning and impact. Like a ratty, faded "Support the Troops" bumper sticker or a flag that is always at half mast.

The staged reunions of veterans with their families has always bothered me. It's a real cheap emotional trick that feels like exploitation to me.

But money talks, they didn't do anything illegal, and most people don't care so I don't expect any changes.

 

[Minnesota]

Another observation, when we're talking about corporate advertising budgets, these numbers are downright minuscule.

• Boston Bruins: $280,000

• Carolina Hurricanes: $75,000

• Dallas Stars: $34,000

• Detroit Red Wings: $41,500

• Florida Panthers: $40,000

• Minnesota Wild: $570,000

The DOD's annual advertising budget averages roughly 500M:

• 2014 FY Enacted: 691.6M
• 2015 FY Enacted: 480.6M
• 2016 FY Estimate: 507.5M

Which makes the amount they spend/spent with the Wild around 0.001% of their total ad budget. The other teams aren't even worth calculating. I'm curious where the remaining $499,500,000 is being spent! (pardon any mistakes; i'm terrible at math)

Source - (page 145)