Rantingprofs: Watch the Numbers

March 27, 2005

Watch the Numbers

The Times has an article about how miserable Army recruiters are. Fair enough, it can't be an easy job.

But notice how this plays out. First comes a list of descriptions of just how bad things can get, individual by individual.

Then comes this:

Two dozen recruiters nationwide were interviewed about their experiences over four months. Ten spoke with The New York Times even after an Army official sent an e-mail message advising all recruiters not to speak to this reporter, who was named. Most asked for anonymity to avoid being disciplined.

That's two dozen total. Ten spoke after the email went out, 14 before. The implication is that those ten had negative things to say, but that's only an implication -- they may have feared being disciplined only because they agreed to be interviewed after being told not to. We don't know for sure from the amount of information we're given here.

Then comes this:

A handful who spoke said they were satisfied with their jobs. They said they took pride in seeing awkward, unfocused teenagers transform into confident soldiers and relished an opportunity to contribute to the Army effort.

But most told similar tales: of loving the military, of working hard to complete a seemingly impossible task, of struggling to carry the nation's burden at a time of anxiety and stress.

Now, exactly how many is "a handful?" Believe me, to someone who works with polls, 24 total barely constitutes a handful in and of itself. And how many is "a majority?" Is that a majority of the two dozen? Or a majority of the ten?

In actual point of fact, we don't know how many of the recruiters are happy and satisfied, and how many are borderline suicidal. Are we talking about an overwhelming majority -- or a close split?

Here's the real issue:

At least 37 members of the Army Recruiting Command, which oversees enlistment, have gone AWOL since October 2002, Army figures show. And, in what recruiters consider another sign of stress, the number of improprieties committed - signing up unqualified people to meet quotas or giving bonuses or other enlistment benefits to recruits not eligible for them - has increased, Army documents show.

The question is, is so much pressure being put on the recruiters that quality is being endangered. Or is the question the quality of life of the recruiters as an issue in and of itself.

Here's what doesn't help: cluttering the article with one extended metaphor. We get it, we get it, the recruiters are military personnel, they aren't in a combat zone, and yet they feel pressure.

But is writing like this really necessary?

"They don't necessarily have real bullets flying at them," said Major Nagler. "But there are different kind of bullets they need to contend with - the bullets of not producing numbers, of having a station commander shoot them down."

The Army is seeking 101,200 new active-duty Army and Reserve soldiers this year alone to replenish the ranks in Iraq and Afghanistan, elsewhere around the world and at home. That means each of the Army's 7,500 recruiters faces the grind of an unyielding human math, a quota of two new recruits a month, at a time of extended war without a draft.

The mission puts them in a different kind of cross-fire: On one side, the military's requirement that new soldiers be found. On the other, resistance by many parents to Army careers for their children in wartime.

This I found interesting:

One recruiter in the New York area said that when he steps outside his office for a cigarette, he often is barraged with epithets from passers-by angry about the war.

In January, the brother-in-law of a prospective recruit lashed into him. "He swore at me," the recruiter said, "and said that he would rather have his brother-in-law in jail for selling crack than in the Army."

So much for that whole support the troops thing, huh?

It is interesting, isn't, that as things get better in Iraq, the recruiters' job gets no easier? It's interesting, too, that the Times gets a bit snarky when commanders send emails to the recruiters bashing them for not making quota that don't take the war into account as a factor in their difficulties, but never considers the idea that the coverage of the war might be a factor as well?

But, then, it's pretty much a rule: the press must never admit or take up the possibility that their own coverage might be a factor in the way events play out.

Jason, meanwhile, wants the same reporter to do a piece on the Times' advertising staff. I'm not holding my breath. I'm guessing he isn't either.

Posted on March 27, 2005 at 10:31 AM | Permalink

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d8342021e553ef00d83458764969e2

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Watch the Numbers:

» Recruiting Soldiers During Wartime Difficult from Outside The Beltway
The New York Times has done an investigation and found that, shockingly, Army recruiters are having a rough time of it. For Army Recruiters, a Hard Toll From a Hard Sell The Army's recruiters are being challenged with one of the hardest selling ... [Read More]

» For Army Recruiters, a Hard Toll From a Hard Sell from Don Singleton
Give them a break [Read More]

» Recruiting from Mudville Gazette
This New York Times article on the tough times faced by Army recruiters has prompted an interesting cross-blog conversation on the topic, conducted by people who know what they're talking about. Start with Milblogger James Joyner at Outside the Beltway... [Read More]

from Mudville Gazette
THE POST EXCHANGE: I've asked my fellow MilBloggers to submit "notable posts" they've written in the recent past for inclusion here, with a quick summary in their own words. I've taken the liberty of linking to some of their stuff... [Read More]

Verify your Comment

Previewing your Comment

Posted by: |

This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.

Your comment could not be posted. Error type:

Your comment has been posted. Post another comment

The letters and numbers you entered did not match the image. Please try again.

As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.

Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.

Rantingprofs

About

blogroll

From Iraq

Please Donate!

Consider Supporting

Recommended Books

News & Views

Search

Archives

March 27, 2005

Watch the Numbers

TrackBack

Comments

Verify your Comment

Previewing your Comment

Post a comment