In the middle of awards season, major announcements in the media and entertainment industry defined February’s news. While Spotify prepares to ramp up its product offerings, new AI-powered tech is winning Grammys and helping make magic happen on the big screen. All this takes place in the shadow of some major policy announcements regarding copyright and AI.
As technology reshapes employment, artists face particular financial challenges, earning 30% less than their peers while lacking traditional benefits. This article examines how cities and organizations are testing new solutions—from guaranteed income programs to innovative pension schemes—to provide artists with greater economic stability.
Educators are grappling with the challenge of integrating AI into classrooms, fearing that these systems might replace traditional learning methods rather than enhance them. This brings us to the question: what barriers prevent educators from implementing artificial intelligence into their curriculum, and how can they be addressed?
January ushered in a new year with sweeping disruptions in media, journalism, and public humanities. Technology-driven partnerships, staff cuts, and mergers have redefined the online media landscape kicking-off 2025, calling into question journalism’s position in an age of generative AI. Read the highlights below.
The grant narrative has become one of the most high-stakes tools of communication in the nonprofit fundraising space, driving more than $150 billion in global expenditures. As grant writers adapt their appeals in response to changing funder values, this narrative network gives shape to the nonprofit ecosystem in which many arts organizations operate.
Naver Webtoon, introduced in “Hallyu 3.0: The Webtoon Takeover,” is the world’s leading webcomics reading application with over 72 million monthly users. Much like Youtube and Spotify, Webtoon manages a user-generated content platform featuring the works of over 130,000 amateur and professional cartoonists. Comics that are uploaded to Webtoon’s user-generated content section, Webtoon Canvas, and have at least 1,000 subscribers and 40,000 monthly page views earn a 50% share of Webtoon’s advertising revenue. Webtoon offers additional payout opportunities including a creator rewards program and their Original Series publishing program that offers exclusive rights publishing contracts and promotion through the platform. This article returns to the question posed in the previous article: How to content generators incorporate Webtoon into their professional practice and to what measures of success?
Have you wanted to learn more about video streaming in the arts but weren’t sure where to start? This list of resources includes examples of video-on-demand (VOD) streaming platforms in the arts, tools for arts organizations considering their own platforms, and news articles covering the sector’s transition to digital.
The landscape of the unscripted video industry is changing. Part 1 of this series explores four case studies demonstrating the current landscape and what features are most appealing to audiences. In this section, the researchers look to experts in the video industry and fans to explore how the landscape is changing and what content providers should expect. This research is applicable to any content provider of unscripted videos. Furthermore, this research serves as an excellent study for understanding what audiences are seeking from the entertainment industry.
The Subscription Video on Demand (SVOD) platform is changing the way viewers watch home entertainment and traditional studios. It is increasingly more difficult to understand an audience’s viewing habits in the over-saturated unscripted programming industry due to the lack of viewer data collection capabilities of SVOD platforms. Through the research and case studies presented in this study, one can better understand a potential audience and what compels them to this type of entertainment.
UX design explains how organizations value and practice relationships with audiences. These relationships are defined by the single and accumulated experiences that occur through interacting with an object in a given context. If an institution truly understands how audience members consciously and subconsciously interact in a given environment, they can better design their spaces and develop programming.
Public art in commercial and recreational structures is a means to bring communities together and directly connect people with the physical space around them. Typically, public art is presented in the form of murals, sculptures, architecture, and environmental art. In addition to social bridging, public artworks can serve as identity-markers for particular locations, mediums to express distinct points of view, and vehicles to inspire personal and social change.
As digital crowdsourced art continues as a mode of art making, it is necessary to developed an understanding of which features of digital arts programming are crucial in the engagement of digital audiences. The following analysis of four digital art projects focuses on the participatory, rather than the interactive, specifically projects wherein audiences become artists by participating in the creation of a piece of art by making one or more creative contributions. Perhaps not surprising, agency and control were identified as significant to participation.
Arts Marketers -- you know the news: mobile is the future and the future is here. Data is necessary to navigate that space, and a recent research report by Jack Loechner breaking down the recent white paper by MobileFirstWorld offers some excellent data on mobile behaviors and strategies to improve on the current national rate of cart abandonment: 78%. To start: here is some startling data that might convince you that mobile is here. Over 30% of the human populations has a smartphone. And once in a user's hand, he checks it over 150 times per day. (Is that you?)
If you told the average San Francisco resident 40 years ago that the art scene in the Bay Area would be gasping for life in 2015, they probably would have laughed in your face. But it is 2015, and that is the reality we are facing. The tech giants have moved in, and tension is building between the Silicon Valley community and its non-profit entities. In particular, arts organizations seem to be at an extreme disadvantage for a few reasons:
In 2000 the Washington DC based Smithsonian American Museum of Art announced the creation of the New Media/New Century Award. The New Media/New Century Award became one of first projects to support new art created for the Web. The museum accepted proposals for original Web-based projects that explored the subject of American landscape, and how the new medium of Web art affected the American landscape as a subject.
Though the project is over 10 years old, it demonstrates the early and exceptional sensibility of the Smithsonian’s curators. They understood the growing relevance new media art and especially Web-art, and its impact not only on people’s everyday perceptions, but also on the art scene as a whole.
When talking about new media art, there is no single definition. According to a 2001 research study by the Rockefeller Foundation, media artworks can be defined according to nine common elements: fluidity, intangibility, liveness, variability, replicability, connectivity, interactivity, computability, and chance. New media art is a very general and broad category and includes many subcategories. Among these, net art, digital art and plurimedia art are the most common within the visual art field. Nevertheless, the meaning of new media is constantly evolving.
Check out Part I for an overview of the NEA’s recent report Audience 2.0: How Technology Influences Arts Participation While Audience 2.0 gives some useful statistics on technology and media participation in the arts, the report does not provide the answers or the data that I am looking for regarding arts participation and technology.
Audience 2.0 draws into question the timeliness of national arts research, the vehicle being used to conduct this research, and the understanding of where arts audiences are heading in the future. This report was a useful audience analysis for 2008, but the survey upon which Audience 2.0 bases its analysis lacked a sense of forward motion as well as the ability to predict future arts participation through rapidly changing technologies.
The data used in Audience 2.0 was gathered three years ago before many current technologies were available and before many new technology users had invaded the digital market. In his blog post Back To The Future, on Danceusa.org, Marc Kirshner states that:
Since the beginning of the 2007 survey period [for the 2008 report]:
- Four generations of iPhones have been released [and the Android network has been launched]
- Facebook’s user base has grown from 20 million to 400 million users
- The entire book publishing industry has been turned upside down by e-readers, such as the Kindle, Nook and iPad
- Millions of set-top boxes, Blu-ray DVD and home theater PCs have connected televisions to broadband Internet
- Hulu launched its online video service to the public
- More than 300,000 people viewed simulcasts and encores of the Metropolitan Opera’s Carmen
- The first 3-D network began broadcasting
The three year time gap between data collection and report publication created a lack of focus on many forms of new media and social networking platforms currently leading many technology discussions in the nonprofit arts industry today. Correspondingly, the relevance of the report in our current environment is brought into question, and we must remember that the report represents a snapshot in time more than a study of current habits. Due to the speed with which technology advances and its usage changes, traditional forms of data collection and publication no longer appear as useful for tracking these trends.
The survey asks about participation in the arts through technology, but Audience 2.0 does not provide answers about specific actions and their effects. The survey does not ask participants if electronic and digital media makes them more or less likely to attend a live event, but the report draws based upon a perceived correlation in the participation data. Without causality data, this correlation leaves us with a “chicken or the egg” dilemma. Does electronic/digital/online participation in the arts lead to an increase in live participation, or are participants in live arts events simply more likely to participate in electronic/digital/online arts events?
I would like to see more direct questions being asked of people who responded that they participated in the arts through electronic and digital media. Obtaining this next level of understanding will provide us with a deeper understanding of the effects of electronic and digital media on arts participation.
Audience 2.0 raises more questions than it provides answers, but it does show a commitment on the federal level to assess the impact of technology on the arts. I am hopeful that future reports will delve deeper into the seemingly symbiotic relationship between technology and arts participation by focusing more specifically on the digital/online arts participant.
