The Department of Homeland Insecurity

Homeland defense as an ad slogan

When I think of Tom Ridge, I don't think of someone who is going to be able to protect me from much of anything. He talks a good ballgame, he sounds good, but for some reason I wouldn't trust him with my lunch money, or anything else. It would appear that I'm not the only one feeling this ways. Maureen Dowd also has trouble equating Tom Ridge with security.

Nobody in America makes me feel more insecure than Tom Ridge.

The man who is supposed to restore my confidence in the prospect of my safety gives me the uneasy sense that the door's unlocked, the alarm's off and there's a ladder leaning up against the house.

He seems like a pleasant, well-meaning guy and admits, "It's not always easy to know the right thing to say or the right thing to do."

But in George W. Bush's pulp Western, Ridge should be a square-jawed extra with no lines.

Last week, the head of Homeland Insecurity unveiled the big strategy he's been working on for nearly a year: a $1.2 million "ready campaign," a PR concoction complete with a "D'oh!" Web site. There are TV ads starring cute New York City firemen telling people to store water and get flashlights, and close-ups of Ridge spouting simple-minded axioms like, "Have a good communications plan for your family."

The new campaign was developed with the help of focus groups convened by the Advertising Council.

I don't expect the Department of Homeland Security to be able to ferret out all the bogeymen who would do us harm. That wouldn't have been possible prior to 9.11, and it is even less likely now. What I'm not interested in seeing is leadership fueled by focus groups and marketing campaigns. Our safety and security is not dependent on what ideas people will buy. Why not just tell us the unvarnished truth? If the Shrub Administration could stop thinking politically for just a moment, they might realize that people are legitimately worried about terrorism. We need information, not marketing slogans.

Tom Ridge clearly is not the man to provide clear, insightful leadership. His public appearances seem scripted to the Nth degree, and he seems singularly incapable of thinking on the fly. My impression is that his public performances are designed to keep us pacified, to keep the public from reaching a state of panic. At least he's done that well thus far.

Bush leads a West Wing that thinks politically all the time. Andy Card talks about rolling out the war with Iraq like a marketing campaign, and now Ridge runs his agency according to the principles of consumer marketing. (And maybe fund-raising, too. According to Al Kamen of The Washington Post, almost half the duct tape sold in the United States comes from a company whose founder gave more than $100,000 to Republicans in 2000.)

What can the Bush administration learn from a focus group of understandably confused Americans about making our borders and ports more secure? Do they have a preferred thickness of duct tape? Should they head straight to the bomb shelter or stop by Blockbuster first?

Peggy Conlon of the Ad Council told The New York Times' Lynette Clemetson that they asked focus group panels if it would be effective for Ridge to use celebrities to instruct the public on safety.

The group participants thankfully recoiled from that idea, knowing that they share little common ground with stars who already have "safe rooms" in their mansions stocked with Pellegrino, Dom and Botox and their "human shield" minions running around buying Prada emergency packs.

The focus groupers also nixed a proposal to have Ridge's ad campaign advise Americans to "be a soldier in your own home."

Right...from the same people who are selling the US Army as "An Army of One", eh?? I don't expect much out of the government when it comes to the war against terrorism. Still, would it be too much to expect something other than slogans and focus groups? How about some solid leadership? Or does that not fit into Shrub's political agenda?