Dear Listers:
     The results are in re my query about event-specific vs.
institution-wide PR.  27 people responded directly to me, plus
the half-dozen or so that you all saw on the list.
     I posted the query to get help understanding the PR pro-
gram for the new museum we are opening in June.  It is dedicated
to "explore and present the history of the automobile and its
impact on American life and culture, using Los Angeles as our
primary example."  The 80,000 sf of exhibits include a perm-
anent presentation entitled "Streetscape:  The Car and the
City in Southern California" (36,000 sf), changing galleries
devoted to H-wood and the car (8,000 sf), technology (14,000),
motorcycles (1,000), and two of 12,000 and 6,000 without
a priori themes.  The balance consists of art galleries.
     The PR team (contractors, not staff) have placed near-
total emphasis on what they term "positioning," which seems
to mean the establishment of a particular identity.  They
let pass by several newsworthy and distinctive events in the
effort to avoid the appearance of a series of stunts.  Our
concern is that a museum this big, that treats its subject
so comprehensively, might not reduce so well to a single
reinforceable identity.  (Besides the cars themselves, we
address architecture and city planning, transportation
alternatives, domestic life, retail, advertising, govern-
ment and institutional adaptation, technological change as
a vernacular phenomenon not confined to a technical elite,
national styles of design and technology . . . )  If we
position as a car museum we miss those people not already
interested in the cars.  Yet if we choose a viably small
selection of items to promote, the fairly impressive
totality is slighted.
 
     THE ENVELOPE PLEASE:  The PR guys win.  All but 4 of
you stated some version of the notion that "museum" as a
particular type of entity is worthy of promotion and, by
extension, of the visitor's attention.  (This might reflect
some skew in the sample group:  you already know what
"museum" is, and value it.)
     The overall characteristics you deem worthy varied
among a few recurring themes:  we have the real stuff,
we have the best stuff, we reward curiosity and invite
reflection that leads to personal growth and social
well-being (slight hyberbole due to compression).
 
     The curatorial team is somewhat relieved as a result
of this exercise.  We questioned the lack of specificity
in the campaign, and wondered whether we were too close
to the material to render sound judgment.  Our task
now is to help emphasize those general characteristics
that will distinguish the place.
 
Thanks to all who responded.
 
Matthew Roth
[log in to unmask]