By Brandi Watters, Herald Bulletin staff writer
brandi.watters@heraldbulletin.com
ANDERSON - The New York Times article published about Anderson's economic recovery last week could end up contributing to the town's comeback.
The story, which detailed the fall of Anderson's General Motors-driven economy and its slow road back to stability, reportedly got business investors from around the world talking.
Linda Dawson, director of Anderson's economic development office, said she's received three calls from national businesses since the article appeared in the New York Times on March 4.
Anderson also got attention in February when the Chicago Tribune published an article about efforts to save the Wigwam from closure.
Dawson said the first call inspired by the national attention came on March 4, right after the Times' positive profile of Anderson hit the newstands.
The following two came the next day.
All three developers called from the East Coast, she said, and all three expressed interest in business development in Anderson.
Encouraged by the New York Times' report that Nestlé Corp. has invested $529 million in the area and complimentary aspects of Anderson's building business climate, two callers are in the process of planning a site visit.
Dawson said the two most serious callers were referred to Coldwell Banker, the city's broker.
One company, she said, is particularly interested in Plant 20. The city owns two former GM plants - 16 and 20.
Dawson could not release the names of the companies. "I can tell you of the three companies, two of them were involved with alternative energy."
She believes the companies were impressed by Anderson's recovery and were seriously considering the city for further economic development. "All three seemed very serious and were wanting additional information. Two of them expressed that they would be arranging a site visit in the next two months."
Rob Sparks of the Corporation for Economic Development found a similar response to the article. "We've been in contact with a lot of people across the United States and across the world, and a few of them have seen the article and wrote back about the positive nature of it."
He said a positive article in a national outlet helps city economic developers to sell the city to the world. "When you're out selling the community and then there's a national media article about it that works its way around the world, it sort of collaborates with what I've been saying."
A New York Times article published three years ago had the opposite effect, he said.
While the most recent article accentuated the positive strides being made to bring Anderson's economy back to life, the Times' first spotlight on Anderson cast a harsh light.
"The article really put a bad light on the negative nature. Without a doubt, you can't lose 27,000 jobs and things be good under any circumstances," Sparks said.
"I think in the past a lot of people have felt we've been attacked in the national media."
After Anderson's first brush with the national newspaper, Dawson was not enthusiastic when she heard the New York Times was in town again recently. "When I first heard that they were going to be in town doing a second article, immediately I became a little concerned that it would be tainted and inaccurately portrayed like the first one was. After I was aware that the reporter was visiting all the proper sites in Anderson, I became comfortable."
Dawson said the latest publicity has been profitable for a budget-strapped city. "Anytime that you're covered in the New York Times, it gives your city a certain validity and it gives you exposure that you cannot spend enough marketing dollars to buy. It exposes you to a whole new group of investors and developers and company owners that it had never crossed their mind to look in Indiana."
The coverage, she said, was just what the city needed. "We could have spent $100,000 and couldn't have bought that kind of marketing."