Engaging Diverse Communities

A Guide to Museum Public Relations

Melissa A. Johnson

• Publisher: University of Massachusetts Press
• Year: 2020
• ISBN:
  9781613767887
• Topic: Storia
• Subtopic: Storia mondiale

As U.S. museums evolve from their role as elite institutions to organizations serving multiple stakeholders, they must adopt new communication practices to meet their social missions and organizational goals. Engaging Diverse Communities, the first book-length study of museum public relations for practitioners since 1983, details how institutions can use communication fundamentals to establish and maintain relationships with a wide range of cultural groups and constituencies.Melissa A. Johnson interviews communicators at cultural heritage museums to understand the challenges of representing communities based on racial and ethnic, generational, immigrant, and language identities. Exploring how communications professionals function as cultural intermediaries by negotiating competing and intersecting identities and mastering linguistic and visual code-switching, she presents an analysis of the communication tactics of more than two hundred art, history, African American, American Indian, and other diverse museums. Engaging Diverse Communities illuminates best public relations practices, especially in media relations, digital press relations, website content production, social media, and event planning. This essential text for museum professionals also addresses visual aesthetics, cultural expression, and counter-stereotypes, and offers guidance on how to communicate cultural attractiveness.

part one

identity and museum public relations

Chapter 1

Communicating Cultural Identity

The Role of Museum Public Relations

A review of the last few decades of museum public relations research would reveal little about how practitioners should communicate about race and ethnicity or reach diverse publics. In fact, stand-alone books about museum public relations on any topic are rare, even though there are 35,000 museums in the United States, all with public relations challenges (Institute of Museum and Library Services 2014). However, given the changes in US and global societies, along with the shifts in emphasis among museums, more needs to be understood about public relations and cultural identity in museum settings.

This dilemma in public relations research parallels a trend in museum studies—a call for more attention to race and ethnicity. Thus, this chapter provides an overview of the museum public relations and marketing knowledge to date, along with a brief synthesis of race- and ethnicity-related research in the museum studies field. It then outlines relevant public relations and identity research. While recognizing the vital roles that public relations practitioners play in helping museums meet their organizational goals, the chapter concludes with a call for society-focused museum public relations, along with models of museum communicators’ roles and museum public relations programming. Finally, an overview of the book is delineated.

Museum Public Relations: A Dearth of Published Knowledge

Public relations is defined as the function in an organization that initiates and maintains mutually beneficial relationships between an organization and its publics (e.g., Broom 2009). Although communication is central, the focus is on the relationship outcomes sought by the organization or publics. However, the study of public relations is not only concerned with such organizational relationships, but “the intended and unintended consequences of those relationships for individuals and society as a whole” (Dozier & Lauzen 2000, 4).

Despite the importance of the museum sector, both at the organizational level and because of the institutions’ impacts on society, only one book about US museum public relations is available. Authored by G. Donald Adams, it was published in 1983 by the American Association for State and Local History. Adams responded to industry needs at the time by addressing communication areas that a survey of public relations members in the American Alliance of Museums had deemed were typical tasks. Given that Adams produced his book before the Internet and mobile media, the focus was on public relations research, planning, budgeting, descriptions of publics, media relations, and publications. To his credit, Adams mentioned organizational issues management, although topics related to race relations were not included.

On the other hand, most of the journal articles about museum public relations in the past decade concerned digital or social media. The majority demonstrated low usage of the interactive capabilities of each medium. These studies will be discussed in the chapters about websites, social media, and digital newsrooms.

In addition, survey research of managers responsible for communication (not all public relations practitioners) at 111 Catalan museums concluded that the museums relied on transactional communication, rather than strategic communication that involved long-term planning and evaluation (Capriotti 2013). Public relations program research was limited and tended to be visitor-centric rather than community-oriented. Moving beyond programming to outcomes, a survey of US art museum members found that those who ranked high on organization-public relationship (OPR) variables perceived their relationships with the museums as long-term (Banning & Shoen 2007). The authors noted such data could also be employed to identify respondents at risk of lapsed memberships, linking relationship outcomes with suggestions about public relations tactics. Again, however, the focus was on museum goals rather than expanded to objectives that would improve society.

In short, the thrust of the aforementioned studies concerned museums’ under-utilization of twenty-first-century communication tactics, along with a lack of strategic orientation or broad views of the community. According to these investigators, museums continued to rely on one-way communication with traditional approaches, thus falling short of public relations’ promise of using communication to benefit museums along with their communities. Race and ethnicity were not broached in this set of research studies.

Museum Marketing: Tips and Tricks Outdo Research Foundations

As just described, little attention has been paid to museum public relations in books or communication journals. Given the dearth of museum public relations research, students and professionals are forced to turn to marketing resources. In fact, most overviews of museum public relations in books have been subsumed under marketing (French & Runyard 2011; Kotler & Kotler 1998; McLean 1997). Such texts have concentrated on the tasks that practitioners must accomplish to achieve museum goals such as building attendance. As a rule, the marketing texts are organization-oriented and not preoccupied with societal benefits.

“How-to” guides include overviews and tips on branding (Wallace 2006), conducting consumer research (Wallace 2010), and event management (Freedman & Feldman 2007). Newer marketing texts mention websites (e.g., Rentschler & Hede 2007; Wallace 2006) but not social media or configuring digital communication for mobile devices. Marketing researchers have delved into a variety of other topics, including marketing to special segments, branding, or atmospherics (French & Runyard 2011; Kottasz 2006; Lehman 2009; Mokhtar & Kasim 2011; Neilson 2003; Pusa & Uusitalo 2014). Most of these are practitioner-oriented, rather than research-based, and race or ethnicity are hardly mentioned.

For example, French and Runyard’s marketing and public relations book, which is UK-centered, reviewed definitions and skills for public relations practitioners without citing research (2011). Deborah Pitel’s (2016) marketing text is another how-to guide, but it is directed toward US institutions, with a special focus on small museums that have limited budgets and staff. It contains useful tips about various technologies, specific instructions for setting up and promoting museum Facebook pages, and similar practical advice. Additionally, in a book centered on Twitter, a UK collection of essays by museum directors, curators, and marketing directors provided UK industry statistics, instructions, content suggestions, and brief first-person accounts about Twitter use by international museums (Landon, Wallis, & Davies 2010). These are functional handbooks.

Museums and Digital Media

A more scholarly text on museums and social media (Drotner & Schrøder 2013) examined a variety of digital communication forms, from blogs to social networking platforms. Although it mentioned their application in museum communication, most of the chapters revealed uses of digital media in curatorial practices rather than in public relations. However, in one chapter emphasizing technologies and audiences, Kelly (2013) demonstrated that Australian museum visitors used online media and social media more frequently than non-museum goers. In terms of “the participatory museum,” the researcher said that new technologies allowed museums to join with citizens to tackle problems on which museums can take a position, such as social justice. Although she urged museum experts to develop more knowledge about digital platforms, she did not specifically mention museum public relations professionals.

Norris and Grams (2008) investigated the use of technologies for building relationships over distances. Their analysis of arts organization websites and blogs found that most were not maximizing the technological platforms, similar to studies described in Chapter 6. However, the authors discovered successful use of MP3 players and cell phones, especially as museum exhibit guides. Although email marketing campaigns and websites were mentioned, much of the rest of the technological discussion in this text was about non-public relations areas in museum management.

Likewise, Connolly and Bollwerk (2016) devoted most of their content to directors, museum educators, and curators. For example, one chapter discussed digital preservation of artifacts, digital museum displays, and training (Billeaudeaux & J. Schnabel 2016). Nevertheless, there were overviews about social media, platforms such as Google maps, and making programs or lectures available online that could be helpful to public relations practitioners.

To conclude, the extant museum public relations and marketing literature is incomplete in its range and largely shuns research-based foundations in its counsel to public relations professionals. Although the marketing guides offer instructive advice for reaching organizational goals, they eschew public relations’ broader mission to contribute to societal goals. In addition, race, ethnicity, and cultural identity are seldom noted. Further, museum studies texts focused on digital communication are largely directed at directors, curators, and museum educators—not public relations experts. Although they are not integrated with public relations, the next section reviews some examples from the museum studies literature that attend to contemporary concerns about race and ethnicity.

Identity and the Twenty-First-Century Museum

Once institutions to serve elites, museums in the United States and beyond have changed in the past few decades from organizations that served White upper-class visitors to museums that wish to attract a wide group of audiences (American Alliance of Museums 2002; French & Runyard 2011; Hooper-Greenhill 1997; Smithsonian Institution 1994). Museum scholars have denoted the need to cross class and ethnic boundaries to reach different groups, regardless of the institutions’ founding missions.

Hooper-Greenhill’s (1997) edited work on developing more diverse museum visitors in Britain presented some of the ideas that have been used to build museum relationships with a range of publics. This included not only ethnic groups, but women and White working-class residents. She noted that traditionally British museums chose staff based on collection expertise that tended toward “Modernist canons,” but it is now important to also employ museum staff able to offer more diverse interpretations of collections and who understand particular audiences (8–9).

However, a 2019 Andrew W. Mellon Foundation study that examined demographics among 30,000 employees in 332 art museums found that 76 percent of museum employees were White. Although significant progress had been made since the last survey in 2015, just 20 percent of museum leadership, curatorial, conservation, and education positions were held by professionals of color (Westermann, Schonfeld, & Sweeney 2019). Thus, museums need multiple resources beyond merely employees as a bridge to various constituencies.

Nevertheless, Sandell (2007) noted that museums can be sites for cross-cultural dialogue and “institutional agents in the combating of prejudice” (136), although they are not the only societal institutions that can affect attitudes. Further, Sandell said, “There are opportunities to develop exhibitions with an acknowledgement of their potential to serve as resources which expand visitors’ capacities for mutual understanding, which challenge, complicate, and begin to unravel prevalent negative stereotypes, and which offer ways of understanding difference which reflect adherence to principles of social justice and equity” (195). These ideas summarize the larger missions of museums in their communities, even though they do not envelop the public relations discipline.

Instead of confronting prejudice directly, Grams and Farrell (2008) focused on how the arts can contribute to their communities and encourage participation from a broader range of participants. They asserted that one impetus for museums’ interest in change was shifting US demographics, not just in urban areas but even in small rural communities. For example, one chapter discussed examples of how arts organizations such as museums diversified their employee bases, generated programs of interest to appeal to diverse visitors, and developed innovative communication techniques to reach a variety of publics (2008).

For institutions with broad missions such as those just described, the definition of the International Council of Museums (2018) is employed in this book: “A museum is a non-profit, permanent institution in the service of society and its development, open to the public, which acquires, conserves, researches, communicates and exhibits the tangible and intangible heritage of humanity and its environment for the purposes of education, study and enjoyment.” Chapter 2 will address culture-specific museums, whose definitions differ slightly.

To conclude, some museum studies scholars have delved into race and ethnicity, but most have been concerned with curation and education rather than public relations. Admirably, the aforementioned researchers have positioned museums as societal institutions with the wherewithal and responsibility to tackle cultural identity and intercultural relations. Correspondingly, ethnicity and race has been considered by some public relations scholars in the last few decades, albeit rarely in museum contexts. The next section discusses these findings.

Identity and Public Relations

Communication researchers have used the terms race, ethnicity, and culture to explore identities and public relations. Ethnicity is defined as identity with a heritage or culture (e.g., Liu, Volcˇicˇ, & Gallois 2011). Culture is transmitted via informal and formal channels over time, and encompasses beliefs, worldviews, rituals, and practices (Waymer 2012). Cultural identity is “the enactment and negotiation of social identifications by group members in particular settings” (Chen & Collier 2012, 45), a definition that recognizes the relational nature of identity, along with its social constructions. As Oetzel (2009) asserted, identity is both enduring and yet ever-changing. Scholars noted that distinctions among race, ethnicity, and culture are not always clear, and often the terms are used as equivalent (Waymer 2012; Liu, Volcˇicˇ, & Gallois 2011). This book rejects definitions of race that rely on genetically inherited physical traits, for reasons described in other chapters. Thus, in this text, the terms will be used interchangeably.

Researchers who have investigated the intersection of identity and public relations have tended to be international or domestic in their approaches. Few combine these contexts, although Zaharna (2000; 2001) and Valentini (2007) have explored forms of integrating culture with global considerations. Whether within the domestic or international public relations domains, the primary emphases of race and ethnicity research in public relations have included practitioner-oriented studies, audience-focused research, and research about strategies and tactics.

The best-studied area concerns practitioners. Looking inward at the field, US-based research about race and ethnicity has concluded that ethnic and racial variation among practitioners is unequal to population variables, and discrimination is manifest in many iterations (Brown, White, & Waymer 2011; Diggs-Brown & Zaharna 1995; Kern-Foxworth 1989; Len-Ríos 1998; Logan 2011; Pompper 2004, 2007; Qiu & Muturi 2016; Tindall 2009)....