Editor’s note: Earlier this year, we announced an essay contest, organized in association with the US Army’s Training and Doctrine Command (TRADOC), focused on addressing the US military’s recruiting crisis. After receiving an unprecedented number of submissions, the essays were narrowed down to a small group of finalists, from which leaders at TRADOC selected the top three.
This essay, from Cadet Jonathan Li and Second Lieutenant Max Xie, was chosen as the contest’s overall winner.
Different people will point to different root causes of the Army’s recruitment issues. Some will say that the increasingly lucrative civilian job market draws talent away from the military. Others will say that patriotism in America is on the decline. Another opinion may blame incidents of poor living conditions and dining facilities. Still others will argue that unadaptable leadership is driving the younger generation away from joining. The potential causes are obvious, but the solution is difficult to pinpoint. Although there is no easy way to tackle any of these issues in a swift manner, one aspect of today’s recruitment environment remains very clear: social media continues to greatly influence public opinion and has become one of the premier ways for organizations to interact with the general public.
Why does social media matter? Simply put, the military recruitment problem is not something that the public is currently concerned about. The ongoing presidential campaign gives us a glimpse of the issues that are on the forefront of American minds. The issues discussed by presidential hopefuls include tax policy, the war in Ukraine, abortion rights, and education. Anyone hoping to see any mention of military recruitment woes would be disappointed. The lack of public concern for recruitment issues is hampering the military’s efforts to address the root causes mentioned earlier. Increased monetary incentives and improved logistical efficiencies require the support of Congress and government leaders.
Without a significant public push, change will always be difficult to implement. In order to combat the lack of public awareness, the Army should fine-tune the way it interacts through social media. Increased positive public interaction will lead to increased recruitment in the future. The key to doing so is a set of actionable initiatives and a better strategy to more effectively reach the Army’s target audience.
A Digital Media Content Strategy
The Army offers a useful case study on how we can utilize existing resources to revamp digital content. To better connect with audiences, the service needs a digital promotion strategy that drives organic growth in viewers and reach and fosters a more interconnected and collaborative environment between organizations within the Army and even across the joint force. We recommend the following:
- Steer away from self-promoting marketing content and focus on content that can contribute to the public interest.
- Leverage resources from existing partnerships (e.g., the Modern War Institute, Fort Moore’s Goizueta MBA Fellowship).
The main goal of this content strategy will be to have the military directly and positively influence the American community.
Problems with the Current Approach
Videos are the most engaging form of social media content; however, the general public is conscious of advertisement tactics and responds negatively to content that is overtly self-promotional. This negative response is often evidenced by the large amounts of comments on such content that further influence the opinions of new viewers. As an example, we can look no further than the comments on the Army’s own “Be All You Can Be” video posted on YouTube. A quick glance at the top comments of the video will show anyone that viewers are not only hyper-aware of advertisement, but also highly critical of obvious advertisement attempts.
We conducted a review of the 115 videos posted since May 19, 2022 on the GoArmy YouTube channel and found all to fall in the realm of self-promotion. We further conducted a review of the 165 videos posted since June 15, 2022 on the official US Army YouTube channel and found that only eight videos are not easily identifiable self-promotion attempts: “The Darby 40 Mile Trek,” “The Battle of Bunker Hill,” the three videos in a Medal of Honor recipient series, the two parts of the “Stories of Hope” series, and “D-Day: Through the eyes of an Airborne Paratrooper.” These eight videos are unique in that they educate and provide value to the general public. Ultimately, we see an over-expression of self-promotional content that contributes little value to broader communities. Furthermore, despite having 1.29 million subscribers, the Army YouTube channel struggles with reach as most of its videos are viewed by fewer than ten thousand users.
In the following sections, we will suggest content ideas to improve the reach of—and response to—the Army’s promotional content.
Given the impact on receptiveness to ads caused by the increased awareness of consumers and negative connotations associated with self-promotion, an effective marketing strategy must address this. We recommend leaning into the 70-20-10 concept of social media marketing:
- 70 percent of the content is focused on adding value to the communities that form the content’s audience (news updates, tips and tutorials, general entertainment).
- 20 percent of the content promotes or collaborates with other organizations.
- Only 10 percent of the content is self-promotional.
The company Nike does a particularly good job of this. Nike rarely runs ads solely promoting its own products or discounts but instead approaches marketing from a storytelling aspect, choosing to highlight stories within sports—such as Serena Williams’s upbringing or, in a particularly good example from a 1997 ad, all of the failures Michael Jordan endured on his way to becoming one of the most recognizable athletes in the world. Through these ad campaigns, Nike was able to bring awareness to its brand without directly promoting the company’s products.
Among the most important questions, then, is how the US Army can develop content to fill the 70 percent bucket that contributes to a wide community. The Army’s ranks are filled with stories to tell. Rather than framing these stories from a recruitment standpoint, we can use these stories to provide greater value to the American community by using them to educate people. Studies have shown that people are more comfortable with things that feel more familiar. Most civilians do not have a clear perception of what being a servicemember entails, so why not transparently educate them on what the Army is like? Here are potential ideas:
- A video series in which soldiers within the signal branch explain their day-to-day jobs and provide guidance to viewers on how to obtain certifications in industry, teach in-depth concepts, and discuss IT careers (similar to content produced by Khan Academy).
- Brief teasers on techniques taught at Airborne or Air Assault School.
- A masterclass from Army Mountain Warfare School instructors on how to tie and use various knots and various wilderness survival skills that would appeal to the rock-climbing and mountaineering communities.
- More videos like “The Battle of Bunker Hill,” presenting further context in a visually engaging animated format. This could also extend to the Medal of Honor recipient series, enabling viewers to clearly visualize the actions of our nation’s heroes. The Army would be effectively appealing to those interested in history and will be a contributing voice in the robust YouTube history-focused community.
- Increasing the content of the Army University Press YouTube channel but also promoting sections that may appeal to history enthusiasts. For example, an animated story of the Warsaw Uprising may appeal to a broader audience.
- Existing resources within the Army can be leveraged through this promotion strategy as well. Individuals who are interested in the strategic side of the military may be interested in hearing more about Modern War Institute research, commentary articles, and podcasts. While some of that content will naturally appeal to narrow audiences, more digestible and shorter content forms (similar to NPR’s Planet Money podcast) could be created to give mass audiences exposure to strategic military thought.
- A big incentive for joining the military is the academic benefits that come along with doing so. We can use our social channels to highlight stories and present tangible advice from individuals that have transitioned out of the Army to get undergraduate or master’s degrees. The overall goal of this initiative would be to humanize the Army and portray our servicemembers in the same light as civilians to show our audience that our Army embraces the military-to-civilian transition and provides veterans with the necessary tools to do so successfully.
While the Army’s recruitment issues stem from many problems, a strong push to fix these problems cannot be accomplished without an increased awareness among the general public. Without the support of the public and government leaders, positive change will always take a long time to implement. Improving the Army’s promotional strategy will be the first step for it to connect and positively communicate with the public.
As of now, nearly all Army content on the internet is evidently self-promotional. Through content ideas suggested above (though not at all limited to them), we believe that successful implementation of our recommended plan—where 70 percent of future Army content will add value to communities—will, over time, result in increased recruitment as the Army becomes increasingly viewed as a value-adding, selfless member of the internet.
Jonathan Li is a current cadet in the University of Michigan Army ROTC program. He is a third-year major in mathematics concentrating in financial engineering.
Max Xie is an officer in the United States Army Reserve and a graduate of the University of Michigan.
The views expressed are those of the authors and do not reflect the official position of the United States Military Academy, Department of the Army, or Department of Defense.
Image credit: Sgt. Tara Fajardo Arteaga, US Army National Guard
Cadet Jonathan Li and Second Lieutenant Max Xie did an excellent job of discussing promotional content and addressing some of the issues that are contributing to the current recruiting shortfalls in the US military. I will respond with some concerns that some of the young people, ages 16-26, have shared with me personally as why they aren't considering the military. Hopefully, someone can take something constructive from it. Maybe Cadet LI and Second Lieutenant Xie can use it as an idea for a future essay.
1. Strict physical requirements. I have spoken to several people, including myself, who were denied the chance to serve in the military for minor physical impairments. I was asked something to the effect of "Do your feet hurt after you run?" yeah, doesn't everybody's. There is questionable reasoning behind fitness testing as well. A 20-year old male is expected to complete the 2-mile run in a minimum of 22:00. A female 23:22. Why should there be any difference if you are performing the same job?
2. Lack of trust in the purpose of the US military. This is different than a lack of patriotism. I have a friend at work whose dad was a marine at the battle of Fallujah. He is adamant that the only purpose of the US military is to protect access to oil. I have heard a lot, maybe the majority, of young people say the same thing. That the US military is only interested in oil.
3. Military healthcare. There is an overwhelming opinion among young people that I have talked to that VA system is laughably bad at providing treatment for veterans. Memes like "have you tried changing your socks" I don't think I need to elaborate.
4. Veteran suicides. A final point a lot of young and not so young people have expressed that military service leads to psychological damage and ultimately suicide. Almost everyone has a story of a broken relative or friend that struggled with mental health and ultimately ended their own life. This is compounded by the fact that the active military doesn't do a very good job of showing concern for veterans. Most of the show of concern seems to come from private groups. Even animosity between private groups and the military.
Please don't take this as criticism of the US military. Hopefully it can spark a conversation and improve digital recruitment by addressing these and actual concerns of recruits, active duty, and veteran service members.
As to Item No. 2 above (lack of trust in [and/or agreement with?] the purpose of the U.S. military today); as to this such item, might the following, also, be a consideration of our young people today:
When young people were considering military service, during the Old Cold War of yesterday, they may have understood that this such service — and national defense accordingly — would (ideally) be aligned with the U.S./the West's goal, back then, to contain — and to roll back — the Soviets'/the communists' efforts to spread communism more throughout the world. (This such communist "spreading" process being one which threatened — not only the U.S./the West's political, economic, social and value status quo — but threatened the political, economic, social and value status quo of all other — non-communist-oriented — states and societies in the world also.) However,
When young people are considering military service, post-the Old Cold War, they may understand that this such service — and national defense accordingly — would (ideally) be aligned with the U.S./the West's post-Cold War goal — of spreading our own unusual way of life, our own unusual way of governance, and our own unusual attitudes, beliefs and institutions more throughout the world. (A process which — much like the communist "spreading" process described in my initial paragraph above — likewise threatens the political, economic, social and value status quo of all other — non-Western-oriented in this case — states and societies of the world.)
Question — Based on the Above:
Might this such change in the primary goal of the U.S./the West — Cold War versus the Post-Cold War — and the purpose of a soldier's service accordingly — might this such change effect whether young people, today, are motivated to join the U.S. military?
(Herein to consider that, if young people today, in truth, look at themselves more as being "citizens of the world," then [a] they may not agree with the above-described U.S./the West's post-Cold War "transformative" goals and purposes and, thus, [b] may not wish to join the U.S. military — which must be aligned with and devoted to these self-same "transformative" goals and purposes?)
Brian, you raise very good points. Your #2-4 items all deal with trust. Do young people trust the US military to ask them to kill and die only for just causes? Will the military take care of me (and my family) when we are injured or sick? Will my military experience result in me becoming a better or worse person?
The solution to the recruiting crisis is not better marketing. It's the military living its espoused values and helping its members become better people. Morality and character matter, especially in the profession of arms.
I thought the first part of this was great. Then lost me at "Digital Media Strategy."
While it's great that two young people are interested in the topic and want to help, the reality is there is an entire job field in each of the services that handle the exact same things the two are talking about and the best ways to carry out plans and communication strategies to align with the Army's needs. Army Public Affairs, Marine Corps Communication Directorate and Navy Chief of Information all have their own respective media strategies for a variety of communication lines of effort with fairly robust staffs to research, analyze and come up with content with which to communicate. Like the two talk about, there are a thousand reasons why people don't join the services and it's hard to address that on social media. Additionally, some senior leaders still do not see or value social media. Yes, in 2023 some senior PA folks in the DOD do no value social media. There are many reasons way service level messaging is floundering (people forced into the MOS with no desire to be in it, inadequate training at the Defense Information School, no prior job experience, etc.) but not have a strategy to do something is far from it.
I think it would be beneficial for the two authors to get spun up by a Corps equivalent or higher level PAO to see how the big overall service strategy works. There's a reason why Communication Strategy is its own degree field at many universities.
I think the authors grasped the Army's strategy pretty clearly, and found it lacking. The point of the article wasn't, "Army recruiting needs to make more use of digital media", but rather, "Army recruiting content is overly focused on self-promotion, and the approach isn't working," using existing digital media content as their case study. But yes, the Army has a strategy…and from all objective results, it's failing.
Perhaps transgenders in the military, the pushing of LGBTQLYW#$$ agendas, and scouring the ranks for phantom white supremacists has turned off a percentage of traditionally minded potential recruits. The Bible Belt has traditionally provided more than its share of patriotic young people to the ranks, and I know my two nephews have completely cooled on their plans to join for just that reason. Add to that the fact that our political leadership is clearly incompetent, and has been at least since it started wasting the lives of our troops in Iraq. Or perhaps military aged Americans have been fed a constant drumbeat of how badly America sucks. Maybe that's it.
It's hilarious to me that outlets like this, and our mainstream outlets, just completely ignore the cultural forces of the last decade when musing about the recruiting shortfall. Why exactly would kids like my nephews want to join when this government and culture has clearly demonstrated just how much it dislikes them?
LOL at the first paragraph of this article. Jonathan Li and Second Lieutenant Max Xie try to list possible reasons for low recruitment numbers, but completely miss the 5 ton elephant in the room. The woke mind virus has completely taken over the United States military. The purpose of the United States on forces is to kill people, and break things. Instead, we daily read articles of soldiers forced to spend their times dealing with pronouns, transvestites in their ranks, and promotions, based on skin color, rather than merit.
If there’s one field of endeavor, that where meritocracy should rain supreme, it’s not the NFL, it’s the United States military, upon which the liberty of our free land depends in time of crisis. What patriotic Christian white male, long the traditional recruiting grounds, you know, the guys who fought the Civil War, World War I, World War II, Vietnam, etc., would want to serve in a military that has turned into a social experiment and jobs program for the “underprivileged” rather than a lethal fighting force?
In October 2020, Major General Ed Thomas — who at the time was the commander of the Air Force Recruiting Service — wrote an op-ed for Yahoo News. It was entitled, “86% of Air Force pilots are white men. Here’s why this needs to change.”
In about 800 words, Major General Thomas outlined his plan to recruit pilots without regard for their competence or fitness or loyalty to the United States. Instead, Thomas explained, the most important thing for the Air Force to focus on was the skin color of its recruits. He said that hiring more black and brown recruits was vital in order to keep pace with Russia and China. They’re busy developing hypersonic missiles that can fly at 20 times the speed of sound, the general wrote — but we’ve got our secret sauce that will keep us competitive. And that secret sauce, as he described it, is diversity. According to Ed Thomas, “Our goal is to get in front of every demographic group in America and show them someone who wears a flight suit every day they can look up to and say, ‘That could be me.’”
Three years after he wrote that op-ed and launched the Air Force’s anti-white recruitment plan, Major General Ed Thomas retired. He inflicted his DEI recruitment strategy on the Air Force, and then he left. So he doesn’t have any reason to care about the consequences. But especially as World War III seems more plausible by the day, the rest of us have an important question to ask, which is: how did this DEI strategy turn out, exactly?
Thomas’ replacement — a general named Christopher Amrhein testified this month before the Senate Armed Services Committee. He informed Congress that for the first time in 24 years, the Air Force has failed to meet its recruitment goal. Once again, for the first time in more than two decades, the Air Force didn’t hit its recruiting objective. It was off by around 10%. And they’re not alone. Amrhein went on to testify that the Army and Navy — which also put a new emphasis on recruiting minority candidates — also fell far short of their projections in the most recent fiscal year, which ended in September.
Brilliant write-up. Perhaps a revisionist approach is needed to gain a new perspective on overcoming these challenges and provide incentives for people to join. Prioritizing outcomes rather than output/throughput would be a much more efficient "school of thought."
That was a tremendous statistical analysis, and I see you have a Tableau chart! Quantitative reasoning is important to gain structural argument- the fusion of a compelling thesis and quantitative analysis is an art form not taught by most major universities. Fantastic summary!
Good job, Wolverines!