What should one realistically expect in terms of results, especially in the area of media placement? In other words, is there a point where the client should say “Surely by now, you should have been able to get something placed?” Even though there are no guarantees, should there be an underlying unspoken guarantee?

This is tricky – there are a lot of consultants out there, and different people have different styles and expectations. I’m putting on an event in a couple of weeks to address these questions, called “How to Choose the Right PR Solution in a Crowded Market” (I’ll be moderating, and some really experienced speakers that I lovingly call “The Big Boys of PR” will be on the panel: https://www.mogotix.com/events/1882)

With PR, marketing and social media consultants that you want to look at two things as a client: first, what is this person’s track record, and, second, what is the process by which they communicate your message, pursue coverage, and create buzz? Some PR folks “spray and pray” – i.e. send the pitch or press release to lots of journalists, hoping that someone will pick up on the story. Others take the time to find the interesting angles on the story, and share that with a hand-picked list of reporters, based on knowledge of the publication and the value they hope to communicate to their audiences (this is my approach).

There are also different styles of follow-up. Some PR folks will keep pressing the journalist, emailing or calling to “drive the message home.” Others prefer to offer some new detail about the story if they follow-up at all.

You want to trust that your partner/consultant understands both what is important to you and what is timely/relevant to the press, media, and/or target audiences, so that, even if they are not producing results immediately, the work over time will build awareness around the right message. One thing to look for is a publicist whose own “voice” and internet presence reflects the same spirit you hope to communicate. I always prefer to work with clients whose message and core product/personality aligns with my values and beliefs as a consumer.

Measuring PR and communicating value is very tricky, but there are some accepted industry-best practices for managing these concerns (for a quick look at this issue, check out #measurePR on twitter). Even if you don’t see immediate results, you should definitely be getting regular updates and clear communication from your consultant, so that you feel confident your message is in the right hands.

Finding the right publicist can be tricky, but knowing your goals, trusting your instincts, and a little bit of love are the best way to avoid entering into a relationship that may not be right for you.

Mitsuko Uchida and Hahn Bin get name-checked, which is interesting – something about Asian artists? And then we have this gem of a comment:

My high school piano teacher often said, rather shrewdly, that “fifty percent of what an audience thinks they hear, they actually see.” She even had her teenaged students wear short skirts when playing for auditions or competitions if there were male judges! (She was the most successful piano teacher in our large metropolitan area, by the way.)…Someone could write a dissertation on the recent phenomenon of provocatively-dressed young Asian women performing on the piano or violin…This sort of thing – concert artist as geisha – demeans and objectifies the performer and does nothing to enhance the music.

A geisha is a fantastical creature, offering a window into another world: “It is still said that geisha inhabit a separate reality which they call the karyūkai or ‘the flower and willow world.’” Performers, like geishas, offer audiences a glimpse of something other. A brand is a promise, and the promise must offer something that consumers want.

For performers, that promise can span from “you can be as cool as me,” to sexual desire, to something fantastical and ethereal. The traditional promise of classical music performers hearkens back to the Romantic Cult of the Conductor, in which the Genius Performer is elevated on a pedestal above mere mortals. Toscannini, Wagner, and the Beethoven Cult drove this deep into our collective consciousness.Bringing sex into the picture sullies this narrative and provides a jarring reality check that may offend more traditionally-minded audience members, especially given the reverence and worshipful atmosphere that the concert hall can create.

However, as Anne Midgette points out, the idea of a young woman dressing to show her body is common in other kinds of music and entertainment, and has been for many years. It’s amazing how the traditional promise remains ingrained in the expectations of many classical audiences – it reflects a lack of awareness of mainstream culture. This can be especially problematic for traveling performers, whose promise to local audiences may not reflect that of the presenting organization.

On the flip side, when the hip performer is unable to live up to the promise, it turns off once-loyal fans. Some re-invent themselves or find new projects, others drop off the map. It’s important to take the time to define an audience, know who you’re trying to reach, and know what they value and want from their favorite performers. When the promise aligns with their values, then you can wear whatever you want, regardless of what the critics think.

Silicon Valley knows intimately that you can’t prevent creative people from doing something they love: whether it’s an entrepreneur or an artist, or just a lone ranger unwilling to work in institutional structures, the drive to create something can’t be turned off, and the supply can’t be diminished. Simply put, you can’t stop people from being creative (*ahem* Rocco Landesman).

Since people are going to do what they love, one way or another, it is in our communal best interest to provide them with the support they need to dedicate themselves to it full-time: for one thing, just like with a startup, it allows them to create better art. For another, and this is the most important and universal truth in every community in the United States, it allows the artist to give up the side job or public benefits they are collecting to support the core thing they are passionate about.

As a community at large, we don’t need to impose our idea of what a “real job” or what “quality entertainment” looks like on artists or entrepreneurs: if they can find an audience and a userbase for their product, they should have the opportunity and resources to pursue that path. There are hundreds of thousands of unemployed people who may not have the creative drive, and don’t have other options or resources besides those service jobs or public benefits. Allowing artists and entrepreneurs to devote themselves to their core work full-time enables a host of benefits to the community, especially the opportunity for the unemployed to pick up those extra jobs and provide for their families.

Essentially, cutting arts funding is cutting off the government’s nose to spite it’s face: by reducing resources for this community, the federal government will create a new group of creative professionals who don’t have the resources to pay their bills, who will add to our collective debt, who will take away jobs from other unemployed workers, and who will collect more public benefits, from unemployment security to welfare and Medicaid.

The GOP-controlled congress, regardless of individual members’ or the party’s vision on “quality art,” cannot seriously think that cutting the programs designed to provide protection and a support system for these people is a good idea.

How does your classical background affect the music you write and play?
Zoe Keating: I’m very fixated on perfection. It’s not enough for me to just improvise; I care about subtlety and phrasing . I still love classical music, but I feel really boxed in by it and I want to interpret it my own way. I play one classical piece live, which is the 2nd movement of Beethoven’s 7th Symphony. But I always say that my piece is a cover of Beethoven.
Kate Campbell (REDSHIFT, piano): I think you definitely need the technical training with a lot of the pieces — they’re written for a classically-trained musician. I also have a certain loyalty to the score and want to do it perfectly , versus a band which may be a more casual or collaborative situation.

Taken out of context, these comments could express some snobbery or condescension on the part of classically-trained musicians, which is sort of where my friend was going with his criticism.

This pushed a button for me: what IS it about classical music? What is it about all these different kinds of music that we lump under this huge umbrella term? Maybe if we can talk about what makes it special, then we can solve the labeling problem that has plagued our craft (with a hat-tip to Alex Ross).

So, I challenge you people who spend your time thinking about and creating and sharing this music: what distinguishes Steve Reich’s Electric Guitar Phase from Jimi Hendrix’s All Along the Watchtower? What makes a reviewer of a pop or country song call it “symphonic” or a pitchfork reviewer draw comparisons to one of Reich’s contemporaries?

There is clearly a noticeable thing that creates a distinction – otherwise, why would we spend our time banging our heads against the wall? The problem is that we’ve lost/buried the conversation under discussions about pedigree and classiness and tuxes, rather than talking about what makes music good, and why all of the composers that eighth blackbird collaborates with are distinct from the new music that Arcade Fire performs.

I welcome your comments and input – let’s dig into this sensibility. A couple things to throw out: there’s something about the way classical forms hang together and tell a story over the course of a piece, sonically, whether or not it has words. I don’t want to talk about obvious distinctions like instrumentations or musician/composer backgrounds – they don’t always matter, as evidenced by Zoe Keating (sidenote: should I use the umlaut with her name? what are guidelines on this?). I also don’t want to talk about source material, because the new composers/creation trends in our urban centers have music coming from source material/inspiration that traditionally would never have been considered acceptable.

Let’s tackle this issue: why should a random average Joe Schmoe come hear REDSHIFT on Thursday night, bringing a classical sensibility to their work, versus the competing show across the Bay, booked by the same owner? If someone knew nothing about music, why should they care?

Why do leaders of cities around the country think of arts and culture as important priorities? Because when creative activity is happening in large and small ways throughout an area, it creates surprising ripple effects of benefits, even for those who don’t participate directly. The arts ripple effect creates at least two kinds of benefits: 1) in the economic vitality of an area, and 2) in how communities come together and understand each other. In economic terms, theaters, galleries, concerts and so on mean more energy and life in a community, more tourists, more renovated buildings, more people and businesses moving to an appealing place. A vibrant arts environment with music, storytelling, and community art centers also means more people coming together to share experiences and ideas, connecting with each other and understanding each other in new ways. Our city has historically supported the arts and enjoyed the benefits of these ripple effects. We should be proud of what we’ve built, and take responsibility for keeping our investment going.

My newest love is ArtsWave, formerly the Fine Arts Fund of Cincinnati, which has engaged the most sophisticated, forward-looking research and framing science to provide the arts and music community with the language and data we need to build broad support for our work in our local communities. The results are positive, forward-looking, present to the needs of our communities nationally, and the results of these sophisticated research efforts and tools are being shared for free for anyone to access.

The arts have a unique ability to lift individuals and communities to a higher and better state, yet many in the performing disciplines are so focused on other issues, and take this truth for granted, or don’t give it the privileged position it deserves in advocacy, publicity and outreach.

“I think that these days, as a member of the arts community, we have to prove a little more to people why the arts are worth it. It’s become more about proving the legitimacy of things. You can’t just say anymore this is great, go see it . . . I mean, even in terms of arts education. Arts education is becoming more about how can you use the arts to promote normal or regular subjects.”

25-year-old woman, arts educator

Many citizens treasure particular arts and culture experiences very highly, and virtually all acknowledge their value. However, there is often no single category that organizes these thoughts, memories, feelings, etc. into one coherent topic in their minds. The research tells us that, “for insiders, ‘the arts’ is a clear and important category (even if it might be a bit fuzzy at the edges).”

In my experience, this category is breaking down even for insiders, especially as the media landscape is burgeoning with so many “arts” options. “The Arts” has traditionally referred to some kind of “classy” work that we’ve put on a pedestal that quickly became a ghetto from the rest of society. “The specific components that all fall under a single heading for insiders are associated with a variety of distinct topics that are not necessarily closely connected to each other.” Why does classical music get a separate category within “the arts” when any other kind of music is subject to market forces, unless booked under the auspices of a “performing arts center”?

“Since entertainment, particularly professional entertainment, shapes people’s understanding of and relationship to the issue, the arts are subject to the economic thinking that people bring to other products. For example, supply and demand comes up fairly frequently, e.g., if enough people want it, they will pay and it will succeed.”

People who aren’t used to thinking about the arts tend to think in terms of art as a school subject. “Art class,” “art teacher,” etc. are familiar phrases, and discussions of the arts easily trigger such associations. Art and music are not perceived as core subjects, so using arts education as a reason to advocate for your organization simply reinforces the secondary status that these products enjoy in the marketplace and arena of public support.

We have a responsibility to our children, grandchildren and future generations to make this city safer; it isn’t going to make any difference if we have the best museums, etc., in the world if you’re going to get mugged or shot while going to or from them. If we do not clean up the city, no one will go to the museums, etc.

39-year-old man, electrical engineer, Cincinnati

Visit theartswave.org for full details of the research methodology, my new favorite geek term “framing science,” and the re-defined mission and funding priorities that came out of this much-needed work. The report is available for download here. Follow @margyartgrrl, the incredibly sophisticated, brilliant woman who headed up the project and advocates for the use of this approach in all areas of arts advocacy, on Twitter.

I attended the Chorus America conference last week, held here in San Francisco, and spoke about social media, knowing your audience, and creating something that resonates with them (the room was crammed full with people standing in the doorway). I supported the Community Sing with Chanticleer (those boys know how to dress sharp!) and generally had fun seeing the SF Conservatory of Music being taken over by 450 conference delegates (mostly avoiding disaster). After everything was said and done, a few of us went out to dinner on Saturday night, and the question of takeaways was brought up.

My friend talked about how everything arts organizations do, whether marketing, or donor development, grant-writing, etc, must be informed by the artistic mission and the story that conveys. I thought, boy, wouldn’t it be great if there were some communications folks (a.k.a. loudmouths) who could help arts organizations with that? I have this crazy idea that I’ve heard this somewhere before…

Tonight, I attended Girls In Tech Digital: The Future of Media in the Digital Age.  Speakers included Shalini Govil-Pai, Group Manager Partner Technologies and Strategy for YouTube and TV at Google, Louise Hart, Founder, CEO, Steady On Productions, Robert J Pietsch, VP of Sales, Sharethrough, Hermione Way, Founder, Newspepper.com, Ashwin Navin, CEO, Co-Founder, Flingo, and Dino Markus, Director of Video, The Bleacher Report. I listened to these people talk about how the successful products in video (an art form of it’s own) have  a resonance with something that the audience values, with a shared experience, and that no one pays for content: we pay for experiences.

I have been preaching this idea that ‘no one pays for content’ to my clients for a little while – my *brand strategy* discussions usually involve sitting in a room saying: “If I know nothing about classical music, why should I care about what you do?”

There are so many talented, well-trained conservatory graduates, composers, people who decide to quit their jobs and pursue their dreams, etc. The standards of how well one can perform, from extended technique to expression to simple chops and finger speed, are constantly increasing as musicians push to be competitive, so it’s increasingly obvious that quality won’t be the defining factor that allows groups to stand out.

I have been working to help music groups find that factor that will connect with a wider audience for a couple years, and I’ve come up with some simple (but not easy) steps to awesome audience development:

1. Define your audience – both current and intended. Who is coming, and who do you *want* to come?
2. Know what your audience likes – think outside just their musical taste, and outside the box of the traditional indicators. Get as creative as possible. It helps if you have someone who is a member of your target demographic or has intimate knowledge of this group, and can speak to their values.
3. Have a product that speaks to this audience and what they value.
4. Talk about why your music says something awesome or transcendent or just great about their values and experience.

Seems simple enough, right?

I know that the word “marketing” can be scary. I know that it’s hard to think about talking about what you do – you’re so focused on your craft, and making it beautiful and meaningful, and I know that you associated “marketing” with advertising and flaks and spin and slick pitches that manipulate people and evil, awful Business Suits. And I know how much you hate that, and how your art is the total anti-thesis of everything that represents.

That’s so great. We need people like you. I am glad that you are making beautiful art and doing it for the sake of Good and Truth and Beauty, and screw the “right” way of doing it, or our parents’ definition of What’s Right or Success.

But if you are creating this art, I bet there are people who need it. I bet there are people whose hearts would be touched and who would be inspired to wake up and be more productive at work the next day if they came to your show. I know there are people whose souls you could feed, and I bet they could feed your art with their lovely Audience Energy and make it more interesting and rich and special.

That is what I am hoping to do. I call myself a “publicist” or “marketing communications specialist,” or “strategic communications consultant,” but all those are is fancy terms for Loudmouth. For “I love music and art and truth and beauty and I want to connect people with it.” For “marketing doesn’t have to mean spin.” For “I can tell enough of the right people to get cool kids through the door of your venue, or to click on Kickstarter, or to download your CD.” And for “it’s OK to tell people about your art, if we tell them in the right way.” You don’t have to sell your soul or “sell-out” or anything like that.

Let’s redefine marketing and PR. Let’s throw out words like “consultant” and “MarCom” and “optimization” and anything else that has NOTHING to do with your art. I’ll worry about that on my end. Let’s turn the word “spin” into a storyteller’s yarn, and “shill” into “shell” – a chamber in which your music and message resonate. Let’s, you and I, get back to well-constructed sentences, and stories that communicate relevance and meaning, and excite and inspire people to take action. Let’s empower our friends and neighbors and colleagues and even those weird smelly people in the corner to get excited about Art and Music and give them something to think about while they are stuck in their cubicles hacking or engineering or pipetting or whatever it is that they do.

I bet you will be surprised. I bet you will smile, and say, “hey, my story sounds so cool when you put it like that.” I bet people will read it and think, “hey, s/he reminds me of myself! I want to go that show.” There might be some people who get angry. That’s OK! Angry people talk about stuff A LOT.

And, who knows? You might, by talking about your art, inspire something else, or cast a net that brings in partners or collaborators, or even (gasp!) some money or some donors or a sponsor. It’s not a bad thing: we need money to feed our bellies, and feed the electricity meter, and feed our souls and feed our collaborators.

With my great, deep, and passionate love for our new work together,

Maura aka @mlaffs

In no particular order:

• Maestro Muti has been back on his feet, conducting the CSO, collecting awards, making the rounds, and programming postponed works, like the Bernard Rands Danza Petrificada, which premiered to an appreciative crowd, even though the homage to Mexico seemed a tad out of place on a program featuring Strauss and Prokofiev. Still, it got lovely reviews, and the work itself stands on its own merits.
• The Opera Company of Philadelphia is tearing it UP in the City of Brotherly Love. Marketing Director Tracy Galligher gave multiple presentations at the Opera America Conference, speaking on flash mobs and YouTube (all amenable to the various unions involved!), partnerships with Curtis Opera Theater that have *increased* ticket sales and support, and all manner of exciting ideas. It was a stand-out example of the overall vibrant spirit of the 2011 Conference, and wonderful to see the proof of the Philadelphia community’s interest in the arts.
• Both the San Francisco Symphony and the San Francisco Opera have June events that are approaching sold-out (on full price, no less!). SFO’s Ring Cycle was 80% sold when rehearsals started, and the coverage is just ducky. Not to be out-done, their neighbors on Van Ness have added additional spots to one of the very first “Community of Music Makers” events, in which average joes have the opportunity to sing on stage at Davies with Ragnar Bohlin.
• I would be remiss if I didn’t mention my colleagues at Chorus America, whose 2011 Conference is sold out, the waiting list list is closed, and the last remaining opportunity to participate is a Community Sing with Chanticleer on June 11. The attendance numbers alone, at this and the other national conferences this summer, speak to our colleagues’ renewed enthusiasm and optimism.

Usually, I ignore you. A guy who patently takes advantage of the economy crashing to promote himself as a consultant and self-proclaimed “Turn-around King” on a national book tour, painted in an angelic light of altruism, while ignoring his colleagues and responsibilities back home, doesn’t exactly inspire me or make me want to pay attention to really *anything* he says. Especially since said arts community in DC is the one that nurtured and inspired me as a kid. And I know how much they can use some collegial support from the Kennedy Center.

However, you caught me this time. I actually *read* one of your Huffington Post columns. Kudos for saying something that caught an incredibly amount of attention across the arts disciplines. It’s too bad that you’re alienating future leaders in the industry, audiences, and basically anyone with half a brain while you’re at it.

The Millennials Project is, simply put, insulting. The illustrations you use and the conclusions that you draw from them are neither indicative of my generation, nor even remotely useful to any other arts administrator, marketer, promoter or really anyone who cares about the 21-40 demographic.

It is, in fact, my belief that the opposite true. I am building a business predicated on the following truths about my generation:

• Millenials are willing to spend money on entertainment options that we value
• Millenials are more educated and smarter than your generation gives us credit for, and we are tired of being underestimated
• There is very little room or welcome in traditional (“boomer” if you will) organizations for Millenials, which is the barrier keeping us away or forcing us to go somewhere else
• Millenials care about authentic, meaningful experiences
• Millenials make decisions based on where they can expect the highest value for the investment of their time, discretionary spending, and energy
• As Liz Maestri pointed out, Millenials grew up in a time of unprecedented arts education. Between the Tiger Mothers, the hippies and the child advocates, the number of kids with at least one year of music education in the 21-40 demographic is pretty damn impressive. I’m one of them, and I’m constantly amazed by the folks who say “oh I played xxx” or “sang in choir” or whatever it is “when I was a kid.”

The difference with Millenials is that this level of education, authenticity, and the values we grew up with is that we like to do things ourselves. Maybe the problem is that everyone is just too busy being empowered, pursuing self-actualization, and changing the world. We don’t want to wait for the Kennedy Center subscription brochure or you to tell us what’s meaningful in the world right now.

Take a look at Kickstarter and the successfully-funded classical music projects on their platform. I’m honored to know some of the folks who have used it successfully, and even more excited to have drawn attention to a couple of them. Talk about people spending money on things they value.

Kickstarter.com has a three-month global Alexa traffic rank of 3,416. Visitors to the site spend approximately five minutes per visit to the site and 61 seconds per pageview. The site has attained a traffic rank of 950 among users in the US, where approximately 61% of its audience is located. Compared with all internet users, it appeals more to Caucasians; its audience also tends to consist of childless, high-income college graduates and men under the age of 35 who browse from work. Kickstarter.com’s visitors view an average of 3.5 unique pages per day. (Source: Alexa)

And THIS is why I hate reading your articles, Michael Kaiser. Spend some time outside the marble halls of the *storied* *Kennedy Center* and actually learn something about what the Millenials value before you paint us with the brush of ignorance. Learn what is relevant and interesting to people aged 21-40. Insulting a target demographic or bemoaning the changes in cultural values won’t help you create a solution to your butts-in-seats problem.

And speaking of butts, kiss mine.

Lisa Hirsch and I recently discussed some of these issues after reading this review of Virginia Opera’s Madama Butterfly. Lisa has no qualms about sharing her opinions of other writers who she does not agree with. Certainly her musicology background, frequent writing in the Bay Area, and knowledge of the industry gives her a position from which to comment on these issues.

It may be that, with the demise of the newsroom, certain publications are relying on less knowledgable writers. Questions have come up about Robert Battey at The Washington Post, especially since his bio just says he’s a “freelance writer.” Are editors phoning it in or hiring staff who don’t have the qualifications to say something meaningful about the artform? It would be a shame if that’s the case, because there are so many talented, well-trained conservatory graduates looking for work.

This question is especially pressing in the case of the San Francisco Examiner and the partner site managed by its publisher. I know the arts editor of the print publication, Leslie Katz, and the primary classical writer, Janos Gereben, and the fact that they do know quite a lot about music when writing for the print paper. I also know that the San Francisco Examiner does not typically review performances.

However, the Examiner.com online site (sharing the same name) engages writers with a variety of backgrounds, to varying degrees of success. There is little distinction on the website for a casual reader, and the buzz online assumes that the ABS review came from a bonafide print review, associating Cindy Warner with the editorial content of the San Francisco Examiner.

On the one hand, Cindy has done a great job of garnering attention and discussion around this article. Jennifer Stumm noted last night how critics in Europe take a different approach than most American writers, although I think we can all agree that good grammar and syntax are, at the very least, crucial.

It seems as though the model that Examiner.com has adopted is an attempt to build community and discussion around their site, in an effort to monetize it. This bears a resemblance to the Cleveland Orchestra‘s controversial critic-in-residence: there’s a decided conflict of interest and mis-respresentation at play. One would assume that the model is working, but I take the cynical approach and believe the publishers are operating on an “ain’t broke” assumption.

Worse still: both examples (Examiner and Cleveland Orch) demonstrate a decided lack of understanding of how these social sites (like blogs) work. They are attempting to manufacture and control socialized interaction with their product. The San Francisco Symphony did something similar with their social network, which has struggled to get off the ground. In a market crowded with social media experts, you would think they could hire someone to help them get it right.

Comments are open: have at it