Rockets as billboards? That might soon be a reality. Yesterday, the Washington Post reported that NASA Administrator Jim Birdenstine had directed the agency to consider selling naming rights to rockets and spacecraft and allowing its astronauts to appear in commercials and on cereal boxes.
Although trading the glimmering white that has characterized space exploration for advertisements might rub some the wrong way, there is a real opportunity to lessen the burden on taxpayers while still ensuring that the United States has a robust space program.
Besides, it’s not as if turning to private companies rather than government funded operations is anything new in the space industry. Already, private companies deliver cargo to the international space station and may soon transport crew members as well. In addition, a number of private companies have been investigating their own tourist-oriented space travel industries.
Given that these aspects of space travel and exploration are already in the hands of private companies, the government maintaining its own up-to-date ability to deliver supplies and crew, as well as pursue new projects, should be a priority. To do those things, of course, requires additional revenue, which Congress and the taxpaying public have, at times, questioned providing.
Placing advertising on spaceships or selling naming rights might go a long way to funding not only current needs but also future projects without NASA having to ask congress for additional money and without taking more from taxpayers.
To be clear, there should be limits on corporate sponsorship of space — especially when it could jeopardize scientific priorities and research. For example, astronauts should not be conducting product research in space or endorsing particular products. (This might mean scrapping Birdenstine’s cereal box idea.) The space program should also not show a preference for specific suppliers of parts based on advertising deals when such preference could jeopardize the safety of space missions.
The need for appropriate limits, however, should not preclude the opportunities to generate advertising revenue from the space program, and determining those limits would be up to lawmakers.
Overall, for American taxpayers, the companies would gain access to prime advertising in space, and the astronauts themselves would have more and better-funded opportunities and equipment. For those reasons, Bridenstine’s directive should be seriously considered.
If America wants to go to space — and there are plenty of reasons to support that effort — why should all of that funding be on taxpayers? Instead, space exploration could be funded, like so many other things, with advertisements.
