Shel Holtz, of For Immediate Release, wrote a great post on the perception of PR in a municipal/ public works setting. 

So many city or provincial projects run into serious misunderstandings with constituents that are effected by the work.  As I work for the Ontario Ministry of Transportation, I regularly see projects that have developed resistance from locals who don’t really understand the project that is underway.  FUD (fear, uncertainty and doubt) seem to have such a grip on people when it comes to public infrastructure projects.  People have such a deep seeded mistrust of the government that they take an oppositional stance immediately.

MTO has been fairly progressive in this respect.  We regularly host Government Information Sessions when in the planning stages for a new project.  These sessions give people a chance to sit down with planning and design people as well as the lead engineer, to have their questions about particular problems and personal circumstances in the context of the project.  It makes people feel better to know that their concerns have been addressed and planned for, we just need to let them know that we have been thinking about their needs.

But the main point of Shel’s post is that often municipal politicians find it hard to justify the money it costs to do those things.  I’m sure that many American cities are in the same cash strapped situation that Canadian cities are.  When your city is operating with deficits and can’t afford to do all of the infrastructure projects that it would like to do, it is really hard to justify that Communications/ PR budget line.

The other point that Shel makes is about the “good” projects that a well constructed communications effort can initiate.  I totally agree, when you would like to mobilize citizens to participate in community driven event or initiatives, getting people jazzed about it is the only way to get them going.  To get them jazzed you must let them know the end game and the vision of the successful project.  Unfortuately self-interest motivates people, and letting them know they will benefit in the end will get them engaged.

Finally, with all due respect to Shel, I would respectfully submit that PR pros should take the emphasis away from the negative preception of PR and focusing on the good stuff.  I’m not a PR pro, but I follow the PR blogosphere/ podosphere and there is a huge emphasis on trying to turn around the perception of the industry.  I would say that pointing out the positive and economically beneficitial aspects of PR would let executives, politicians and business leaders learn about the positive value of PR.  Constantly coming back to the “unethical behavior” of the few gives legitimacy to the concerns of sceptics. 

I know that PR people are doing good work.  Tell us more about that.

This entry was posted on Thursday, June 22nd, 2006 at 6:00 am and is filed under Communication, Public Service. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.