This is where I begin reading about the actual execution of the Geek the Library project.
(Well first, one sort of side-note question: on page 2 of this section of the report, it is mentioned that there are guidelines that restrict “lobbying” by libraries. What does this mean? For a library, I mean.)
As has been said before, the main thing that needed to happen for libraries under the Geek the Library program was that perceptions of modern libraries needed to change. As well as the research that went into finding who would and would not support library funding, Geek the Library used effective (and adorable) advertising techniques, such as the appropriation of the word “geek” as a positive construct and even posters showcasing how libraries support all that a person could possibly “geek” over. The campaign also required what were called “pilot libraries,” or the libraries to first test the water, so to speak.
The report talks about its “multipronged marketing approach,” using traditional advertising techniques (“traditional” meaning billboards, posters, radio ads and the like, right?), as well as events and presentations to local communities. There was e-mail marketing, online marketing, public relations initiatives, and even a website (that is still operational).
Community promotional events seem particularly effective to me, as it seems to give a chance for the initiative to present facts one-on-one while receiving the kind of feedback one does not necessarily get from just pasting ads on billboards. But seriously, so many different kinds of advertising tools were employed in this project that it would be better for me to leave it to the report to tell about it. What I’m curious about at this point is: how does one create so much material for advertisement while lacking funding at the home front? I’m sure that will be answered slightly further on.
No comments:
Post a Comment