Public relations strategy for relocating the Center for the Arts

3 “The Community and the Center for the Arts” Swaying public opinion depends on a number of factors: first, it depends less upon the message that needs to be communicated and more upon trends in society that are pushing people to embrace specific ideas. By identifying these trends and taking advantage of them, the message of the PR firm can be embedded within that trend (even if it is antithetical to the trend) by simply embracing the movement and spinning or directing it towards the channel that the PR firm wishes it to adopt. The way to do is to appear credible and authoritative in the re-direction (Community Tool Box, 2016). In this case, the community wants to maintain the old building because of its history, cultural significance, and the traditional aspect of it. By embracing these ideals of history, culture and tradition, the PR firm should be able to channel the community’s love of the Center for the Arts towards a new building. The way to do this is to promote the Center’s history, culture and tradition in the abstract sense, disconnecting it from the place and visualizing it in terms of progression and evolution—inviting the community to be part of the Center as it enters into its next phase of development, which is geared not towards the past but towards the future and the coming generations. Emphasizing the coming generations and how they will be impacted by the move from the old building into the new will be to the Center’s benefit because it will be highlighting the underlining aspect of the community’s attachment to the old—the fact that it is connected to aspects of their youth and the memories they have of taking their own children there. By giving the new children a new place and one that is more conducive to its needs, they can emphasize what the new structure will be able to provide and avoid confrontations with what the old structure was able to give. This would correspond with what Mireles (2014) identifies as the principles of liking, social proof and reciprocity. The information that would need to be obtained would have to be specifics about what features the new building would indeed be offering: these would have to be presented in a visually stimulating and appealing way so that the community could see why the move would improve the overall enjoyment of the Arts. The audiences that would be targeted would be the Board, the major donors, supporters, advocates, stakeholders and visitors of the Center because, after all, they are the ones who patronize the place. They need to be won over. Reaching all these different audiences would depend upon uniting them under one common vision of what the new Center will be. Two-way communication would work in this instance by inviting the community to express ideas about what they would like the new center to offer in terms of experiential enjoyment. The developers could them counter with ideas and public discussion could be had in which a back-and-forth is achieved. The future use of the current building should not be forgotten either. It could become part of the plan by ensuring the community that it will still provide some use but in a different manner. It could be preserved as a museum or as a landmark of cultural significance or sold to the Historical Society, which would be tasked with upkeep and maintenance of the property. This would enable the community to still be able to cherish the building while being allowed the opportunity to grow with a new Center in the 21st century. Or part of the two-way discussion could focus on ideas about what to do with the old building and how to use its property effectively. Ideas could be floated such as turning the grounds into a park so that children could still visit—and feedback from the community could be welcomed. The main idea would be to incorporate the community into the process, instead of alienating them; the underlying assumption being that the move is essential to the life of the Center in the coming years.