The Mission Paradox Blog

You TV

As the media both shrinks (in terms of the numbers of "eyeballs" mainstream media outlets attract) and expands (in terms of the sheer number of media outlets) there is nothing more vital then the ability to tell your own stories.

What's going to replace your local newspaper?  You are. 

Your website.  Your blog.  Your social media tools.  Those of the things that will remain when your local newspaper shuts down their printer.

In many ways, you are going to have to be a journalist that is covering your own organization.

What does that mean?

It means writing a lot more content for your website then you are probably doing now.  Having a strong writer on your marketing team is more important then ever.

It means a heightened commitment to being transparent.  People's BS meters are strong.  They are going to expect that things you say to be the truth and be looking for any indications otherwise.

It means being willing to talk about things that don't directly relate to your own organization.  On the blog my day job hosts some of the my widely read posts are the ones that talk about our industry in general, or our neighborhood. 

Remember, just talking about yourself all the time is boring.  It's a big world out there.  Don't be afraid to talk about it.

 

PR v. Publicity

Seth on the difference between PR and Publicity

Never Do This

Calling an art critic to complain about a poor review they gave you is almost always a bad idea.

If they reviewed your current work poorly the damage, assuming there was any, is done.

If you are venting in the hopes that they give your next work a more positive review then you have to wonder if a critic who is so easily swayed is worth bothering with in the first place.

But if you feel like you simply MUST talk to a critic after a bad review you should NEVER do what the leader of one of the largest nonprofit theatres in the country allegedly did, i.e. dismiss some of their comments as "stupid" or say that they are not really a "critic".

Why?

Because not only is bad form, you also give said critic all the ammo they need to do a blog post and let the world know about the encounter.

Look, I understand a bad review can deeply upset someone.  They spend months or years pouring their heart and soul into something only to see it beat up by somebody with a comped ticket and a note pad.

But lashing out doesn't improve the situation . . . in fact it can make it far worse.

Because the critic now has the power to blog about it.

Which led to me blogging about it.

Which will lead to others noticing it.

And thus a review whose power (assuming it had any) had long since expired is revived.

So as a general rule, leave the critics alone.  Your life will be easier if you do.

(to be honest I'm also wondering if the artist who called the critic would have been as aggressive if the critic was a "he" instead of "she" .  . . probably so, but it was something that popped in my head)

 

Arts and Media Tip #2 - Be the Expert

So you are working on the first tip I gave to get more media exposure to your art, having a strong local presence.

Now let's talk about the second tip, positioning yourself as an expert.

-------------------

I've had a chance to engage with a decent number of media types and one of the things I have noticed is that when you initally approach them, they seem a bit reluctant to talk.

That's because it's very rare that these people are approached by someone who doesn't have some sort of agenda.

So the minute you approach one of these folks telling them that they "really need to see this play/recital/exhibition you are doing" they immediately, instinctually, ignore you.

This is the media filter you need to find a way past . . . and as you may have already discovered . . . talking about "your art" may not be the quickest way to do it.

A much quicker way to get that done is by positioning yourself as an expert in some arts related thing.

Maybe you know a bit about fundraising with not a lot of money.

Maybe you have an expertise in contemporary dance.

Maybe you know a lot about the history of storefront theatre.

Maybe you know a lot about how demographic shifts are changing the world of dance.

If you are knowledgable about something like that and the media knows it, something remarkable happens . . .

They start calling you.

Because while the media doesn't really like people who constantly ask for stuff, they LOVE people who can help them out by getting them access to good information fast.

Once the media starts noticing your expertise, they quickly start to notice your art, which means that your art (and you) start to make the short list of artists people think of when they need a story.

Arts and Media Tip #1 - Dominate your local turf

In the city I live in, there are about 235 theatres, another 50 or so dance companies, tons of arts galleries and museums, etc.

Now let's take a closer look at those 235 theatres, just for an example.

Out of those 235, I'd wager that 230 of them are local theatres meaning that their primary audiences comes from (or at least should come from) people from a 5-10 mile radius of where the organization performs.

In general, I see two types of arts organizations . . . those who embrace their "localness" and those who ignore their local market and spend their time trying to reach the more "attractive" arts consumer from other parts of town.

With very few exceptions, ignoring your immediate locale as your primary source of audience is a big mistake.

Local audiences need to be extremely loyal and once you have a built a relationship with them, you may be amazed at how far they carry what you do.

Now, what does that have to do with expanding your media presence (this week's topic)?

I see so many small to medium sized arts org investing a ton of time and energy in trying to get the attention of big media, i.e. their local paper(s) of record, the ABC affiliate station, etc.

For many people that time would be better spent embracing the media tools your neighborhood has.

Here's what I mean:

In the Hyde Park neighborhood where my day job is, there is both a local paper The Hyde Park Hearld and a local blog, The Hyde Park progress. 

Does your neighborhood have something similar?

If yes, then go make some friends over there.  Take the paper editor out to lunch, make sure the blog writers see your work.  It will take you far.

And if the neighborhood doesn't have something like that . . . then start it yourself.

Yes, I'm serious.

Put together a blog about your neighborhood's art scene, publish an email newsletter about events having in the area. 

These are the sorts of things that can embed your organization in the fabric of a community.  When that happens you get audience, you get donors, you get Board members.

So spend today making sure you know every local/neighborhood media outlet, it could help you more then you imagine

 

Critics 4 Life

Count me among the relatively small group of people that thinks the loss of critics (sparked by the cost cutting and imminent closing of many newspapers) is a bad thing.

The arts needs good critical voices because those voices help consumers to make informed decisions about what to see (and avoid).

More importantly, a critic with a strong reputation is one of the vehicles I have seen (outside of audience word of mouth) that can convince someone to take a risk on an entire new artistic organization . . . or occasionally an entirely new art form.

Now I know in this tech advanced word we can replace your newspapers local critic with 100 online critics, but it may take a while (if ever) for any of those critics to develop the credibility need to drive a substantial audience in one direction or another.

Plus, losing critical voices tends to hurt smaller arts organizations that need a good, widely read, review to build audience for their work.

If I were those smaller orgs, I would start reaching out and supporting a few of the good online art critics.  I'd make sure they came to my shows, I would give them info to report, maybe even buy an ad or two on their site (if they are into that sort of thing). 

Trust me, you need a few of those critics with a small audience to become critics with a large audience . . . so don't be afraid to help them on their way.

Things you should never say in public

Alright, here's the story . . .

Chicago's Goodman Theatre presented a musical called Turn of the Century. The musical was written by Rick Elice and Marhsall Brickman and directed by Tommy Tune.  For many in the theatre industry, the production in Chicago was considered a "try out" before Elice, Brickman and Tune took the piece to Broadway.

So it seems like a good deal right?

The Goodman gets to present a big time musical (and charge a nice penny for folks to see it) and Elice, Brickman and Tune get to see how an audience reacts before investing in a Broadway run.

What could go wrong?  Well . . .

When the play was produced in Chicago, it got mixed reviews. 

Now a play with a lot of hype behind it getting some mixed reviews isn't exactly news . . . but I found what happened next to be really interesting.

In a follow up Chicago Tribune article, the creators of the piece talked about the production.  Here is a section from the article, written by Tribune arts reporter Chris Jones.

Elice had only good things to say about working with the Goodman Theatre. But clearly, the strictures of doing a new Broadway-sized musical on a regional theater schedule had been something of a rude awakening for the production team. "Turn of the Century" had only a handful of preview performances before the press showed up, instead of the usual weeks of previews typically enjoyed by shows in out-of-town tryouts, such as "Drity Dancing."

"Come back and see the show in a week or two," Elice said, lightly. "By then, it will be where it would have been at the end of the usual preview period."

Trickier yet, limitations on rehearsal time (most of which is needed for understudy rehearsals) has made it impossible to put in major changes in Chicago. Those will have to wait for the next incarnation.

"We put on the show we honestly thought we wanted to do, Elice said. "But with the best will in the world, having sixteen hours of rehearsal time between the first time an audience saw the show and opening night was just not enough to implement what we immediately started to learn once we had an audience."

(Emphasis added)

So basically you just had the creators of the musical you are running (and still running for another few weeks) say the following:

1.  The play wasn't that good . . . but it really wasn't our fault

2.  You people that saw the play during the first few weeks were screwed, you really should have came later.

3.  The really good version of the play is coming to another town . . . later.

Did I mention that the play is STILL RUNNING?  So what you have is the creators of the piece pointing out flaws in the piece WHILE THE PLAY IS STILL RUNNING!

So if you are the Goodman Theatre, how the hell are you supposed to sell tickets to the rest of the run of the show . . . . while the creators of the piece are saying that?

--------------------------

Folks, this is what a public relations nightmare looks like.  You have one group (The Goodman) trying to make some money off the remaining run of a show and you have another (Brickman, et. al) basically trying to save face.

The lesson for you in all this . . . choose your artistic partners wisely.

The other lesson . . . when talking about an artistic event that doesn't meet critical standards . . . DON'T MAKE EXCUSES.  Just take your beating and move on.

---------------------------

UPDATE:  First, much love to Kris Vire for linking to the post.

Second, I had a few people email me and say (basically) that the article wouldn't matter to the Goodman because they had already sold a ton of tickets way before this article (or the mixed reviews) came out.

This may be true, but it misses the point which is . . .

What about the next show?

What happens the next time they bring a show into town for the big "Pre Broadway" tryout?  I can easily see a situation where people are hesitant to purchase advance tickets because the bad taste in their mouth left by the show (and the follow up article).

---------------------

But the thing for YOU to remember (since you probably ain't a major regional theatre) is that the things your artistic partners/collaborators say and do have a direct impact on you.  So likely I said above . . . choose wisely.

The Flip Side To Good Public Relations

Read my other posts on public relations here and here

------------

Take a look at this.  It is an article about an upcoming production the day job is doing.

And it is an example of what good PR can do for you.

Now let's be clear.  I didn't get this article placed.  We have a fantastic PR team that handles it.

So when I read that I thought two things:

1.  Great job for PR and that is good news for that particular show.

2.  That article is also bad news for the show that comes after it because it probably will not get good press.

It's an unavoidable fact of public relations life that the press is always reluctant to give any arts organization too much good coverage.  There may be a few exceptions to that, but generally that is how it goes.

So if a dance company produces 8 performances in a season, maybe three will get a decent amount of press

And if a musem does 20 exhibitions a year, maybe 5 will get good press

The lesson here is that a smart artist or arts org DECIDES IN ADVANCE what shows they want/need to get covered by the press and then works to get those shows noticed.

Yeah, you may decide you want/need every show to get covered . . . but remember that isn't likely so it is better to pick and choose.

The pick and choose process can be as simple as writing down all the performances you plan on doing in a year and deciding, "our press efforts will be directed toward Show A and C".

Trust me, deciding in advance can save you a ton of time because nothing is worse then trying to get the press to pick up on a story that has zero chance of being covered.