Best of COMM 270
Of course everyone did a great job on their WordPress portfolios this semester. But if I have to choose…
Kelley Longyear
Kelley worked hard on her portfolio, and it really shows. Not only is her blog extremely straightforward and easy-to-read, it’s also very visual and engaging. She did a great job of incorporating appropriate images and video, which made reading her blog easy and fun.
Rocco Carzo
Like Kelley, Rocco did a great job of incorporating images and video with his text. Besides being visually interesting, though, his blog offered great information and insight. It was thorough, professional-sounding and -looking, and incredibly organized.
Jeremy Houghtaling
Like the other two, Jeremy did a great job of finding relevant media to match to whatever he had written. Besides this, though, his writing had real personality and was at times really funny.
Filed under: Uncategorized | 1 Comment
Interested in PR? You’re in luck! Even if PR’s not your thing, this is the class for you! COMM 270, or Introduction to Public Relations, taught by Professor Kyle Reinson at St. John Fisher College, is perfect for everyone and you’ll see why. Check this out, talk to your advisor, and sign up today!
1. KNOWLEDGEABLE PROFESSOR—Kyle Reinson
has been an Associate Professor of Communication and Journalism at St. John Fisher College since 2007. With nearly a decade of PR experience to his name, Professor Reinson understands the ins and outs of the business. An industry expert whose work has been mentioned in publications like The New York Times and USA Today, Professor Reinson knows his stuff and is enthusiastic about teaching his students what he knows and loves about his field. Unlike many professors, though, he is just as enthusiastic about learning from his students. He encourages you to contribute and welcomes your comments as well as your questions, praising you for what you know, and never belittling you for what you may not. Besides being a great teacher who knows what he’s talking about, though, Professor Reinson is a super funny and laid-back guy.
2. FLEXIBLE SYLLABUS—Hate rigid syllabi? Like to work at your own pace? Perfect. Professor Reinson understands that as a college student, you’re busy. He also knows that you’re able (and that you probably prefer) to set your own schedule and budget your time accordingly. As a result, his assignments do not have due dates. You read right: NO DUE DATES. Also, over the course of the semester, as Reinson gauges the class’ progress, the syllabus will undergo some changes. But in the real world, a PR professional (and arguably, anybody in any profession) has to be flexible. You always have the opportunity to revise every assignment. Because all assignments are completed online, the no-due-date policy only emphasizes the tentative nature of the Internet, the ability that people have to constantly edit and revise what they post online. As long as you work at a consistent pace, the flexible syllabus can only be seen as one of the course’s greatest assets. 
3. GREAT TEXTBOOKS—The design of the course is centered around two supremely useful textbooks, written by two of the biggest names in the world of Public Relations: Stuart Ewen and Tom Kelleher. Both distinguished professors of PR—Ewen at Hunter College, and Kelleher at University of Hawai’i at Mānoa—the two take very different approaches in addressing the field and its major concepts.
In PR! A Social History of Spin, Ewen details the history of PR—from its birth, pre-WWI, through the 1970s—examining the changes that have come about since the days of Edward Bernays and Ivy Lee.
In Public Relations Online, Kelleher looks at the movement of PR onto the Internet, examining the benefits, the downfalls, and offering solutions for the effective and efficient practice of online PR.
The textbooks are both informative and interesting (and yes, relatively inexpensive!). Because of their popularity in the field, though, they’re also available online through Google Books, as well as at some public libraries.
See Stuart Ewen in action here:
Walter Lippmann
Edward Bernays
4. PERTINENT PR INFORMATION—You’ll learn about the biggest names in PR history, and about their contributions to the industry as we know it today. Ewen’s book will expose you to the history of PR, following a timeline from Edward Bernays’ WWI-era work in the industry, and Walter Lippmann’s examinations of the industry, right up to the end of the 20th century. Plus, you’ll get to read the writings of these men, as well as those of PRockstars like C. Wright Mills and Daniel Boorstin. After a look at the past of PR, a reading of Kelleher will give you a look at the present and future of the industry, and its movement online.
release and a social media supplement, to developing and writing a white paper for an organization. The course, too, strongly emphasizes the use of new media. Traditional note-taking is not something you’ll be doing here; instead, during films and presentations, you’ll log into Twitter and tweet comments and questions to your classmates. Are you used to printing out and handing in a final at the end of the semester? You won’t be doing that here because every assignment you complete, you’ll post to a WordPress blog. All of these experiences, while certainly important for a PR-hopeful to have, are at the same time relevant to all students across all disciplines. And anyways, who doesn’t love Twitter?Filed under: Uncategorized | 1 Comment
White Paper
Tom Kelleher’s book, Public Relations Online, unarguably stresses the increasing importance for organizations to practice their public relations online. However, I would argue that Kelleher’s overriding message has nothing to do with online public relations at all. I believe that Kelleher’s main point is that while the Internet makes public relations easier to practice, makes the conversation between an organization and its publics more convenient or even, theoretically, more efficient, there still must be a conversation between the organization and the public. People may use the Internet to practice public relations, but people are still the ones practicing public relations. In other words, the Internet may be the means to an end, but should never just be seen as the end, itself. These points, I feel, can and should be applied to Strong National Museum of Play to improve the museum, itself, as well as the way in which it practices public relations.
Strong National Museum of Play is a collections-based children’s museum located at 1 Manhattan Square in the heart of downtown Rochester. With nearly 300,000 square feet of space, it houses four franchised restaurants, a circulat
ing MCLS library, an archived research library, a preschool, an artifact museum, an indoor butterfly garden, and over a dozen permanent interactive exhibits, from Reading Adventureland and a life-size recreation of Sesame Street, to Super Kids Market—a smaller-scale replica of a Wegmans store. Through its ever-growing collections, education programs, and exhibits, Strong Museum encourages children to learn, create, and discover.
Certainly, Strong Museum is a beloved and unique Rochester institution, but it is not the only museum of its kind; in fact, the Children’s Museum of Manhattan and Boston Children’s Museum both have a very similar mission to Strong’s. While Strong is not necessarily in direct competition with these museums, it can still benefit from watching how they promote themselves, and following their examples.
I propose a plan for Strong Museum, then, that balances Kelleher’s ideas with the examples set forth by nearby children’s museums.
The Plan
Online Gift Shop
For an organization with such a strong dedication to play, Strong Museum’s two gift shops—both of which s
ell books, games, costumes, plush characters, and toys represented in the museum’s National Toy Hall of Fame—have no online presence.
Other children’s museums, such as Boston’s and Manhattan’s, for example, offer visitors to their website the opportunity to purchase items from their gift shops. Boston Children’s Museum even goes so far as to offer “featured toys,” which change weekly based on sales. 
Now, Strong Museum provides links to the academic journal it publishes—American Journal of Play—as well as to outside journals, articles, and studies on the physical and psychological benefits of playing, but it doesn’t allow visitors to its website the opportunity to purchase the tools for play. Here, Strong is missing a great opportunity. Not only could an online store create additional revenue, but it would allow the museum to promote its National Toy Hall of Fame, as well as its associations with Sesame Street, The Berenstain Bears, and Curious George.
Moreover, as the museum prides itself on being a breeding ground of creativity and imagination, it is the perfect stage for a sort of toy “try-out” program, wherein toy manufacturers could send newly-developed prototypes to the museum for demonstrations and product testing.
Community Outreach Programs
Deservedly, Strong Museum is nationally- and internationally-renowned, and it prides itself on its “Rave Reviews.” While it should be proud of attracting visitors from as far away as La Quinta, California and Heidelberg, Germany, the museum should also commit itself to serving the community in which it resides. And for the most part, it does. As part of the “Annual Appeal” detailed on its website, Strong provides a list of its community outreach programs, including Summer SUN (Strong’s Urban Neighborhoods), Passport to Family Fun, Foster Family and Refugee Family Admissions, and Play Therapy Access for Children with Disabilities. While these programs provide assistance to thousands of children every year, Strong is missing a great opportunity to publicize them, both to the people whose donations would support them, and to the people who could use their support.
Currently, though, the only information that Strong provides on these programs is the abovementioned list. As these programs depend upon donations, and the donations depend upon the donor’s feelings of connection to an issue, this information is not nearly enough. Kelleher discusses James’ and Grunig’s situational theory, wherein people either “see an issue as a problem and get concerned,” “feel like they can actually do something about the problem,” or “see the problem as relevant to their own lives” (109). Quite frankly, though, if Strong does not provide any information besides the names of the programs, the people will not wholly understand the good that these programs do for people in the community, and will not be likely to donate the money to support them.
Teen ambassadors for BNY Mellon City Access, one of Boston Children's Museum's many community programs
Therefore, I suggest that Strong begin by following the lead of both the Children’s Museum of Manhattan and Boston Children’s Museum. Both of these organizations outline, on their websites and in detail the outreach programs that they provide to their communities. More than just information, though, I think that Strong should provide photographs and video of the programs in action, as well as the personal stories of the families and children these programs assist. By providing potential donors the opportunity to see and hear the people that their money will help, they will be more likely to feel a personal connection, and thus be more likely to donate. This increased attention—and the pathos of the attention—should increase the public’s likeliness to donate, which in turn will increase the programs’ capacity to help people.
Examples:
As Kelleher points out, though, “Public relations people must be careful…not to assume that all—or even most—of the people they should communicate with are online. Many of the most important global challenges in public relations are about communication among people who do not have access to the Internet” (107). I suggest that Strong Museum take this into account when publicizing its community outreach programs to the programs’ potential recipients. Because many of the families that these programs aim to help are lower-income, they may not have consistent access—or access, at all—to a computer. In order to reach these people, then, and make them aware of the opportunities Strong Museum provides, the museum should resort to legacy media. Longer and more frequent television and radio spots that detail the programs, specifically, would be a good start. In much the same way, print advertisements in the Democrat and Chronicle and other local publications would bring attention to the programs. Brochures could be placed in local establishments like grocery stores, schools, doctor’s offices and hospitals, churches, libraries, shelters, and city buildings. By making the information generally-available across many mediums will ensure that people who need to see it will see it.
Conclusion
Strong Museum is a beloved Rochester-area attraction, but it is missing a great opportunity to strengthen its name and image even more than it has. The museum can achieve this easily through the addition of an online store, as well as better publicity for its many community outreach programs. While the museum does give back to the community, it does not take credit for this as it should, and it does not effectively promote its programs to potential donors or potential recipients. Besides the image boost that publicizing these programs will give the museum, once people are able to actually see the families and children that these programs help, they should begin to feel an emotional connection to them. Then, once they feel an emotional connection, they will be willing to donate their money to support the programs on which the families rely. Simultaneously, the museum will target the people who could benefit from these programs, generating knowledge of and interest in these programs. The hope is that the increase in donations would increase the capacity of the programs enough to carry the increased number of beneficiaries.
Fact Sheet
ORGANIZATION: Strong National Museum of Play
HISTORY: The Margaret Woodbury Strong Museum was first founded in Rochester in 1968 by avid toy and doll collector—and the museum’s namesake—Margaret Woodbury Strong. When Strong died in 1969, she left her estate to the museum; her contributions—both of money and objects—sustained the museum, and by 1982, it had rebuilt its structure and reshaped its purpose. With Strong’s collections as a fixture, the reconstructed and almost 150,000 square-foot museum concentrated on the history of American industry. During the 1990s, Strong Museum conducted extensive market-research, and ultimately chose to market itself to families, and families with young children at that. In 1997, the museum welcomed the arrival of a working vintage carousel and 1950s-style diner car—both of which it housed in a newly-built entrance atrium. After being awarded a federal grant in 2005 in the amount of $150,000, Strong Museum underwent construction once again; this time, for the addition of several new interactive exhibits and over 100,000 square feet of space. At this time, the museum changed its name from Strong Museum to Strong National Museum of Play, emphasizing its dedication to the study and practice of play. What began as a quaint artifact museum of Mrs. Strong’s toy collection is now a nearly-300,000-square-foot space—home to the National Toy Hall of Fame, Grada Hopeman Gelser circulating library, Woodbury Preschool, and over a dozen interactive exhibits that all encourage learning, creativity, discovery, and above all, play.
MISSION: On its website, Strong Museum describes its three missions: collecting and preserving artifacts of play, educating children, and serving the greater Rochester community with its many outreach programs.
Q&As
I used the Q&As more to test the museum’s willingness to respond than to actually get answers. What I found is that employees–even those responsible for representing the museum online, either by answering questions via email, or updating the museum’s Facebook page–did not have time to, or were not comfortable corresponding through email.
To info@museumofplay.org:
1. Is the museum currently represented by a PR practitioner? If yes, what are this person’s/organization’s responsibilities?
2. How does the museum handle questions and comments on its Facebook page?
3. It seems that the museum values education almost as highly as it values play. What kind of education programs does the museum offer to children in the community?
4. Strong National Museum of Play is undoubtedly a Rochester icon. In what ways does the museum give back to the city and greater community?
5. Approximately one in four Rochester families lives below the poverty line. Does the museum offer assistance to those who are unable to afford admission? If so, how? If not, why?
6. Rochester is home to many different people, from many different racial/cultural/religious backgrounds. Does the museum celebrate these differences? If so, how? If not, again, why?
7. Rochester is home to the largest per capita deaf population in the United States. Also, the nearby town of Batavia houses the NYS School for the Blind. Do the museum and its educators honor alternative modes of communication like American Sign Language and Braille?
8. How does the museum accommodate guests with physical, developmental, or learning disabilities?
9. Has the museum ever been awarded a federal grant of any kind? If so, what kind of grant was it, and how was this money used? If not, has the museum ever applied for any?
10. What, in your opinion, is Strong Museum’s greatest achievement?
No response.
To Susan Trien, one of the museum’s three PR practitioners:
1. Do you handle the museum’s PR work—online or otherwise? If not, who does? If so, what are your responsibilities?
2. How does the museum interact with the public? Is the museum affiliated with any online social networking sites? If not, why? If so, how does it handle questions and comments posted online?
3. Strong National Museum of Play is undoubtedly a Rochester icon. In what ways does the museum give back to the city and greater community? How are these efforts publicized?
4. How does the museum appeal to its—for lack of a better term—“target audiences”?
5. What is your greatest challenge in working for Strong National Museum of Play? What is your greatest reward?
6. What, in your opinion, is Strong Museum’s greatest achievement?
7. In the Preface to his book, Tom Kelleher says that “online public relations is more a matter of what people are doing with online media technologies than what these technologies are doing to people” (xiv). Do you agree? Why or why not?
Response:
Sarah,
Please give me a call and we can set up a half-hour interview during which I can answer many of your questions below. I don’t have the time to respond to all those questions in writing and prefer talking on the phone. Thanks.
Susan
Filed under: Uncategorized | 3 Comments
Kelleher MegaQuiz Part Two
1. While Kirk Hallahan has his own website, the site is more of a conglomeration of links to other websites than anything else. Hallahan provides links to his own resume and bio and contact information, but offers little else. He also has Facebook and Twitter identities, but doesn’t seem to utilize them at all. Although on the whole, it seems, he conducts himself as a knowledgable professional in person, Hallahan’s online PR skills could use some brushing-up.
Hallahan teaches PR and Advertising at Colorado State University. His writings have been in publication since 1992; the most current is a chapter entitled “Being Public: Publicity as Public Relations” in the book Handbook of Public Relations.
While it’s extremely easy to locate and purchase his books online, it’s much more difficult to locate James E. Grunig, the man and noted PR “guru.” While he has a Facebook identity, his last post was from December of 2009.
Filed under: Uncategorized | Leave a Comment
Kelleher MegaQuiz
1. While discussing the importance of dialogue between an organization and its publics, online-PR expert Tom Kelleher makes use of the term “dialogic loop.” Kelleher explains that a dialogic loop is the open line for communication, not just between the public and an organization, but between between the organization and the public as well.
Examples:
Strong National Museum of Play: http://museumofplay.org/about_us/index.html. The website for this nationally-renowned museum is just as interactive as the museum itself. Besides providing the public the opportunity to make comments and ask questions through a “Contact Us” link, Strong Museum also has its own Facebook page, the link to which is posted on the museum’s website. This Facebook page allows past visitors the chance to comment, offering either praise or criticism; potential visitors the chance to ask questions, either of other, more seasoned visitors or of the museum’s employees; and people who haven’t previously visited or even considered visiting the chance to do so.
David’s Bridal: http://www.davidsbridal.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/HelpFAQView?langId=-1&storeId=10052&catalogId=10051&subCategory=Help&contentName=help. The David’s Bridal website, besides providing customers with a fairly thorough FAQ page, also allows them to chat online with a store representative and ask questions about orders, payment, or even which shoes or handbags or jewelry would match any given dress. David’s Bridal also provides access to its own Facebook page. This page allows past, present, and potential customers make comments about their experience or ask questions about products; a representative, as was the case for Strong Museum, personally responds to each of these customer posts.
Free People: http://www.freepeople.com/index.cfm/fuseAction/content.page/nodeID/30618ee2-f62a-4653-a434-61dabcc7a013/. Free People, the mother of Urban Outfitters,
2. In their 2003 study, Lance Porter and Lynne Sallot investigated ”how Web use [varied] by roles practiced in public relations and thereby [contributed] to the literatures on roles as well as new technologies in public relations” (Introduction). Porter and Sallot asked two questions: “What is the relationship, if any, between practitioners playing different roles in organizations and how they use the World Wide Web?” and “How does gender impact different roles practitioners play and their World Wide Web use, if at all?”
Filed under: Uncategorized | Leave a Comment
MegaQuiz #2
ROCHESTER, NY, March 6, 2010 — On Friday, April 9, St. John Fisher College will host John Stark Bellamy II, author and great-grandson of the famed socialist and author, Edward Bellamy.
Bellamy is the author of the classic nineteenth-century utopian novel Looking Backward: 2000 to 1887. The story follows a young American man who falls into a deep sleep in 1887 and awakens 113 years later, in the year 2000. According to historian Wayne Sneath, “Looking Backward…anticipates a future America of nationalized industry, equal distribution of wealth and the destruction of class divisions.” The book was a bestseller in its time, and retains a great deal of its popularity—and controversy—even today.
After reading from his great-grandfather’s book, Bellamy will present his lecture, “Looking Forward: America in the 22nd Century.” The presentation will forecast the future of our country’s government, economy, and culture according to the elder Bellamy’s century-old predictions. Following the presentation, Bellamy will take questions.
The event is scheduled for 6:30 pm, and will be held in Basil 135.
For more information, please contact the College’s History department.
###
Filed under: Uncategorized | Leave a Comment
Mega-Quiz #1: Sarah and Ciera
Ciera’s questions/Sarah’s answers:
1) View this video on tweeting and reflect how Twitter has become a medium to allow others to view the small moment of anyone’s day.
Tweeting, like the video illustrates, connects people. Like other social media sites like Facebook and MySpace, Twitter allows people to incorporate themselves into a group, creating a sense of acceptance. Because it allows people to communicate with others around the world, and faster and on a much smaller scale than even a phone call or e-mail or blog post, it has become extremely popular, and in many cases, the most efficient and preferred way to connect with others. Just as Twitter’s ability to link people can be seen as a benefit—like sharing information in a classroom setting, for example, or to bring attention to an event or cause—it can also be seen as a detriment. Because opinions can be shared so quickly and so easily and between anyone in the world who has a Twitter account, in some cases—like during elections—Twitter has the power to impact an individual’s critical-thinking skills, making them almost dependent on what others think in order to come to a decision.
2) From Woodrow Wilson in 1914 to President Bush in 2001, manipulation and persuasion to enter a war has been necessary. Both Bernays and Mills describe propaganda as one of those necessary means. Find two videos of propaganda from each time period and compare how they are similar and different.
3) Why are stereotypes so prevalent in the media?
In your answer, discuss:
- how they might be portrayed
- how does Mills describe stereotypes
- how does Lippmann describe stereotypes
In the introduction to his book Public Opinion, Walter Lippmann explains the process behind creating stereotypes. He explains that because the world is too big, and its range of people and things too broad to ever individually and accurately represent, we must essentialize the world and everything in it, reduce everything to a near-archetype of what it really is.
C. Wright Mills held a somewhat similar view, which he detailed in his book, The Power Elite. Mills explains that although stereotypes are not necessarily accurate or even logical, they are an appeal to our emotions, a way of calming our fears about the complexities of the world, and micro-managing each aspect on a smaller scale (312).
I think stereotypes are prevalent in the media for these very same reasons. Because stereotypes create neat bundles of information, they perpetuate. Because they perpetuate, they become more and more recognizable, and as they become more and more recognizable to an audience, the media sees no other way of getting through to said audience without using them.
Kelley’s example of teen movies is a perfect example of this. By creating archetypal roles like “jock,” and “nerd,” and “goth,” and reusing them over and over, teens become accustomed to seeing them, and begin to see themselves as associated with whichever most accurately represents them.
Sarah’s questions/Ciera’s answers:
1. In his review of Mills’ The Power Elite, George Vetter argues that “the volume should be required reading for all college administrative officers” (696). Why would Vetter argue this?
2. Mills published The Power Elite in 1956. Can you think of an example from the past year that demonstrates his ideas and proves them still relevant?
3. What are the benefits of social media over traditional legacy/industrial media? Imagine Walter Lippmann was alive today. How might he react to online phenomenon like Google, Facebook, and Twitter?
Filed under: Uncategorized | 1 Comment
It seems that I’ve come to an understanding of exactly how “increasingly paperless” this world is becoming (thanks, by the way, to The Office for the phrase, which can be found here http://www.officequotes.net/no3-16.php). I mean, I obviously had some indication when my parents started receiving fewer and fewer letters and more and more e-mails, and then when my dad lost his job at the Democrat and Chronicle because http://www.democratandchronicle.com/ began systematically killing the paper-and-ink newspaper. I certainly don’t resent computers, though, and I’m no stranger to them. In fact, I appreciate the convenience of Facebook and online news sources, and I understand how inconvenient it would be to have to wait at my mailbox mailbox for concert tickets or a letter from a professor, detailing changes to a syllabus. Regardless, I still hold some papered activities close to my heart, like, for example, note-taking. I’ve become so accustomed—while reading, listening to a lecture, watching a film—to putting pen to paper and keeping a paper trail of what I’m reading or hearing or seeing that tweeting during War Made Easy
felt unnatural and uncomfortable. I think, at least for me, writing is such a separate activity from typing that the two employ different parts of my brain. When I write, I’m somehow able to better concentrate on whatever I’m responding to or recording, and that information is more soundly incorporated into my memory. While I was typing on Monday during class, I found myself easily distracted from the film by the supplementary articles I was coming across. This isn’t to say that I completely discount tweeting as invaluable. Because tweeting allows us to read others’ reactions to the film, I think we are each able to make better sense of the film, itself. Moreover, because tweeting allows for conversation, the record stays more active, more relevant and comprehensible for much longer.
Filed under: Uncategorized | Leave a Comment
