The State of the Field: A Report from 2004 Regional Meetings

Introduction
In 2004 NAMAC conducted four regional think tank discussions with media arts leaders in Atlanta, Georgia; Albany, New York; Columbus, Ohio and Lincoln, Nebraska. Representatives from a total of twenty-eight cities, eight states (including Tennessee, N. Carolina, Oklahoma and Kentucky) and sixty-six organizations were involved in thinking together about the direction of the media arts field. The think tank discussions also served to strengthen relationships and provide feedback to help NAMAC assess its services to the field. Sponsoring organizations were the Southern Arts Federation, the New York State Council on the Arts, the Wexner Center for the Arts, the Experimental Television Center, WAMC, and the Mary Riepma Ross Media Arts Center.

During the think tank sessions, participants were asked to comment on key trends impacting the media arts, to consider the implications of these trends for their future practice, and to identify the type of support and assistance most needed by their organizations. This report is a synthesis of what was learned during all four sessions.

ENVIRONMENTAL SCAN: KEY TRENDS
Think tank participants highlighted a variety of key trends influencing the media arts: a changing cultural landscape as media saturation intensifies and the media arts are increasingly incorporated within other disciplines; fluid boundaries as public, nonprofit and private sectors interact in new ways and new organizational forms emerge; broadened access to digital technology, which has increased the amount of new work produced and the number of new distribution outlets; continuing media consolidation and corporate control, including threats to the public domain; political polarization, which has contributed to the new popularity of POV documentaries; a continuing shift from mass to niche media audiences; demographic changes, particularly the emergence of grassroots, ethnic, and youth voices; and a challenging funding environment for the arts for the foreseeable future.

Media saturation and the sound bite world
An Albany participant noted that “media and art are becoming conflated as media invade every thought, action, and part of our jobs now…and media art is being folded within a broad spectrum of contemporary practices.” Lincoln think tank attendees emphasized the “sound bite world” we are living in and the intensifying competition for people’s time and attention; at the same time, they noted that public awareness of independent films and “the concept of indie film” have grown.

Fluid boundaries
The blurring of boundaries was also highlighted as an important trend. Atlanta participants noted that public, nonprofit and private sectors are interacting in new ways across what were previously more well-defined boundaries and domains. Examples include: nonprofit and for-profit organizations working together more often, and the continuing increase in public sector contracting with nonprofits and for-profits. The blurring of boundaries between artists, musicians, filmmakers and activists was highlighted in Columbus, along with the rise if DIY culture, “which means lots of freedom in developing and distributing work, but without the stability that institutions bring.” MoveOn.org was cited as an example of a flexible and effective organizational model in the emerging media environment by an Albany think tank attendee.

Digital technology: new work and more outlets
Lincoln attendees emphasized that technology is increasingly accessible, fostering more new work and more outlets for new work, from the Internet to microcinemas. Along with the growing amount of visual media being created is an “anything goes” attitude concerning appropriating copyrighted work without permission, Columbus participants said. They noted that awareness of copyright law is often lacking, and much new work is being created without a basis in theory, history and critical focus; at the same time, some exciting new work is emerging that would not have been possible without the increased access to digital tools and distribution options such as DVDs. The development of broadband Internet for the delivery of digital media was viewed favorably by participants at the Atlanta think tank session, while they acknowledged that the digital divide would continue for the foreseeable future.

Consolidation and corporate control
Media consolation and corporate control continue to shape the media and cultural landscape, think tank participants said. Columbus attendees bemoaned attacks on the public domain, such as proposed changes to copyright law that would further erode access to historical works by artists and the public. Clearances to use copyrighted work are cost prohibitive for independents, participants in Lincoln said, while corporate studios are “branding the indie label.” Consolidation among media companies will continue, Atlanta think tank attendees said. However, there is a “silly putty” effect in which new media outlets and public spaces emerge in spite of (and sometimes because of) consolidation. “Consolidation always creates new forms of resistance,” one participant said.

Political polarization
Political polarization was another important trend identified by think tank attendees. Lincoln participants reported that the conservative political environment has a negative impact on some private funders, who are now more reluctant to support controversial projects, and that a federal “litmus test” already exists for public funding (e.g. funding for public radio and television). Columbus attendees noted the increase in activism in recent years and the growing interest in POV documentary films.

From mass to niche audiences
Albany attendees observed that the economic model for broadcast TV is falling apart, including the concept of the mass audience, which may give independents more leverage. Participants in Atlanta reported that independents are leading efforts to create niche audiences. As one filmmaker said, “We’re already gearing our work to niche groups, connecting multiple perspectives and multiple types of media.… We’re connecting with specific audiences in deeper ways, for example, with screenings and discussions—creating community experiences.” Closely related to the movement from mass to niche audiences are demographic shifts. In particular, think tank participants pointed to the growth of grassroots and ethnic communities in the U.S., as well as younger generations who have different assumptions and preferences in their utilization of media than their older Baby Boomer and Gen-X counterparts.

Funding challenges for the arts
A final trend discussed by think tank participants in all four cities was the continuation of funding challenges for the arts. Attendees noted the decline in arts grantmaking as private funders are increasingly pulled to address a greater array of concerns including basic social needs that were previously addressed with public funding. Some participants said they continue to feel the impacts of the NEA’s politically charged decision during the 1990s culture wars to eliminate direct financial support to artists; such support was often crucial in leveraging private funding for new work. An Albany participant observed that “funders used to listen to artists,” while Lincoln attendees reported “a disconnect between artists and funders.”

IMPLICATIONS
Based on the scan of trends, participants were asked, “In this emerging environment, what will we need to let go of?” and “What will we need to do?”

What to let go of…
Think tank attendees suggested that those involved in the media arts would benefit from letting go of traditional models (of production, exhibition and distribution), outdated concepts of “audience,” over-reliance on public funding, aversion to everything big and corporate, biases against new technology, the “fuzzy” image of the media arts, and the tendencies to overwork and over-reach.

Traditional Models
Atlanta participants identified a variety of traditional media arts practices that are not well-suited for the emerging environment. Examples included: focusing on providing cheap equipment access now that access to media tools is widespread, and emphasizing the premier of new work (the “do it first” mentality), which inhibits collaboration and is not always the best way to serve audiences. Lincoln attendees suggested looking to the development of microcinemas and other artist-run groups for inspiration rather than relying on traditional exhibition models, which are often focused narrowly on quantitative measures of success (e.g., “butts in seats”) that emphasize a singular form of distribution and do not address impact.

Over-reliance on public funding
Lincoln and Columbus attendees emphasized letting go of over-reliance on public funding. In Albany and Atlanta, participants suggested letting go of fear and suspicion towards “corporate thinking” and capitalism, thereby opening possibilities for creative (and sometimes unlikely) partnerships.

New technology fears and biases
Several think tank attendees spoke of the importance of letting go of their fears and biases around new technology. One Lincoln participant emphasized the need to “let go of our pretensions” and become more open to new media forms such as video games.

“Fuzzy” image and loose definitions of our field
Albany attendees highlighted the fluid and unclear image of the media arts field: “We need to let go of fuzzy thinking and loose definitions,” one participant suggested, stating, “In 30 years we have not clearly defined our field.” The youngest think tank participants observed that many young makers do not identify with terms “media arts” and “media artist.”

Over work and over-reach
Finally, Columbus think tank participants suggested letting go of “trying to be all things to all people” and taking on too much work, sentiments that were echoed in the Albany meeting.

What to do…
In looking to the future and responding to the question, “What will we need to do?” think tank participants emphasized leadership development; stretching into new technology domains; deepening community engagement and audience development; influencing funders and creating new forms of support; telling our stories (as organizations and as a field); determining a common agenda and organizing to influence public policy; teaching media literacy, and collaborating, including creating new structures.

Develop staff leadership
Participants in Atlanta, Columbus and Albany highlighted the importance of cultivating the next generation of staff leadership, including strengthening business skills and broadening leadership development beyond the executive director level within organizations. An Atlanta participant suggested seeking out youth as mentors and remaining mindful that “mentorship is a two-way street and we have a lot to learn from them.”

Build experience with new technologies
Think tank participants urged greater acceptance of multimedia and suggested that media arts practitioners need to build expertise—or at least comfort—with changing technologies. Columbus attendees highlighted the tremendous growth of the annual Allied Media Conference in Bowling Green, Ohio, which draws media activists, educators and makers involved in all types of independent media from zines and community newspapers to films and videos.

Deepen community engagement and cultivate new audiences
In the future independent media makers will need to deepen community engagement and cultivating new audiences, think tank attendees emphasized. Many positive examples were offered from their experiences, including the following:

• Door-to-door outreach and person-to-person conversations brought new people to see Flag Wars, a documentary about the conflict between Columbus’ traditional African American neighborhoods and newer gay-lesbian residents.
• Atlanta’s High Museum “markets the experience, not just the film.” For example, an Iranian film series was valuable due to the cultural validation created by bringing the community together, even though the same films were available via satellite.
• At the University of Memphis, many well-known documentaries chronicling civil rights struggles are the basis of discussion groups involving students and other community members. Although the documentaries are not new, the context and community building provide value.

Atlanta think tank attendees said that in light of the niche nature of audiences, it is becoming increasingly important to pursue multiple exposures, multiple uses and multiple distribution vehicles. Lincoln participants discussed engaging communities beyond exhibition: “Partner with community organizations for deeper outreach, involve them in the production process, and burrow into the community with creative uses of productions.” Albany attendees noted that person-to-person contacts are needed to nurture specific audiences and to “branch out from our high brow, intellectual cinema audience.”

Influence current funders and create new sources of support
Looking to prospects for future funding, think tank attendees recommended proceeding on two fronts: influencing current funders and creating new sources of support. Columbus participants noted that there is potential to exert greater influence on philanthropy now that more program officers in the foundation world have media background. The potential to work more closely with field-serving groups such as Grantmakers in the Arts was highlighted by Atlanta attendees. They also suggested: “Do the research. Learn about the five-year plans of potential partners and funders. Focus on commonalities. Know about their interests and speak to shared passions such as particular content areas.” Several think tank participants spoke of the potential to expand corporate sponsorships, as long as clear parameters are in place to avoid corporate influence over programming decisions.

Think tank participants suggested a variety of new sources of support. Albany attendees urged exploration of for-profit ventures to generate funding for the media arts. Lincoln attendees discussed forming partnerships with local business supporters who have enthusiasm for a particular type of work. For example, an area coffee house initiated the Extreme Film Festival, which has been successful in attracting Gen X and Gen Y audiences. During the Atlanta session, Appalshop offered two examples of new avenues of support: In once instance federal transportation dollars were secured to help renovate a new media arts facility because the building was a former car dealership. In the other case, Kellogg Foundation funding was received for a media component that is part of a much larger community development initiative.

Tell our stories and histories
Think tank attendees in all four locations suggested doing more to tell the story of independent media, including articulating the field’s histories. “We are storytellers, yet we have a hard time telling our own story,” a Lincoln participant observed. Albany participants discussed the importance of writing about media arts histories, developing critical literature, and drawing inspiration from the collective creativity that has characterized the field. They urged “keeping art at the heart” of discourse and self-definition.

Columbus participants urged, “Develop new rhetoric for why we exist” and “Get on the radar!” They suggested tying the media arts story to economic impact. One participant commented that in Cincinnati alone, the arts generate 2.5 times more revenue than sports. Atlanta think tank attendees highlighted the need to communicate across sectors, translating to those outside the media arts community to build relationships. “Keep the meaning but lose the jargon,” one participant recommended.

Set a common agenda and organize to influence public policy
In Albany, Columbus and Lincoln, participants spoke of the importance of organizing the field for greater visibility and influence in the public policy arena. One Lincoln attendee made the case as follows: “Come together with a unified voice, determine our common ground, set an agenda, and help decision makers and the public understand the importance of the media arts.” Participants in the Albany think tank urged, “Recognize ourselves as an industry and collectively organize to impact policy,” and “Pursue advocacy in many forms—distributed networks rather than just one big block.” Finally, a Columbus attendee suggested working on all fronts: “from grassroots activism to lobbying in suits.”

Teach media literacy
Columbus and Lincoln think tank participants emphasized the importance of teaching media literacy. One attendee highlighted the need to “move from media consumption to media literacy” in rural areas where people are able to access media productions via satellite, but without much contextualizing. Another participant urged support for grassroots media making opportunities, such as public access television, which are at the frontlines of teaching media literacy.

Collaborate and experiment with new structures
Greater collaboration and creative organizational forms were on the minds of think tank participants as they looked to the future. Ad hoc organizational structures designed to subvert the dominant paradigm were suggested in Columbus. One attendee recommended that media arts groups “adopt snake-like behavior: slither off the radar, exist underground for awhile, then strike quickly to disrupt the status quo.” Columbus attendees also advocated for collaborations between established and emerging groups, as well as collaborations across different media. Lincoln attendees suggested experimenting with collective organizational structures and collaborative initiatives, while Albany participants suggested more collaborative events and international collaborations in media production and exhibition.

SUPPORT NEEDED
After discussing trends and their implications for the media arts, think tank participants responded to the question, “What support or assistance would be most useful to your organization in this environment?” Key themes included: professional and organizational development; networking, convening and peer support; expanded online communications, and field building through unified communication and advocacy strategies.

Think tank attendees emphasized developing leadership in key staff (in addition to executive directors) and providing professional development for artist administrators.

Organizational development needs included capacity building for planning and fund development as well as support for securing federal tax-exempt (501-c-3) status and accessing highly specialized technology expertise (e.g. database creation and management, and Open Source software).

In-person discussions and peer networking were highly valued by think tank participants, who emphasized their need for local and regional gatherings to share ideas and information and work collectively. Expanded online communication opportunities, such as listservs and other online tools, would be useful, they said, as long as online communications build from in-person relationships.

Other support needs identified by think tank participants included field building through unified advocacy and communication strategies. Columbus and Albany attendees emphasized the value of working jointly at the national level on public policy advocacy with groups such as the Alliance for Community Media, Free Press and CTC-Net. The need for public policy advocacy at the state level was emphasized by Columbus attendees, who suggested working in conjunction with groups such as Ohio Citizens for the Arts.

Albany participants made the case for promoting public space in the media landscape, articulating the economic impact of the arts, and documenting/communicating about our rich media arts histories. Lincoln and Columbus attendees urged the creation of a unified voice for the independent media field, and they highlighted the need for a public communications strategy to “interpret and translate our value to the mainstream.”

IN SUMMARY…
Think tank participants representing sixty-six organizations in twenty-eight cities painted a picture of a media arts environment that holds both threats and opportunities. Many of the trends that surfaced reflect this duality. Fluid boundaries across sectors and disciplines have made self-definition a continuing challenge for the media arts field, but have also contributed to new interdisciplinary work and new collaborations. While intensifying media consolidation continues to cast a long shadow, the spread of digital technologies has broadened technology access, contributing to an explosion of new work and the emergence of new distribution outlets. The advent of extreme political polarization, while not a favorable trend, has contributed to the public’s increased awareness of the POV documentary and, as one think tank participant observed, “the concept of indie media.” And as broadcasters struggle with the decline of the mass audience, independent media makers are providing leadership in cultivating niche audiences and supporting the emergence of grassroots, ethnic, and youth voices.

In reflecting on these trends, think tank attendees suggested several strategies to position their organizations and the field for the future: attend to leadership development to support the next generation of staff leaders, build expertise with new technologies, deepen community and audience engagement, influence current funders while also creating new forms of support, document and communicate the stories and histories of the media arts, organize around a common agenda to influence public policy, teach media literacy, and pursue creative collaborations—including experiments with new structures.

The continuing work of NAMAC, in its capacity as a national organization, will be essential to advance these strategies. In particular, the think tank session findings suggest that NAMAC build on its existing programs and services to support the media arts field through organizational development, leadership development, convening in-person gatherings, creating opportunities for peer networking and support, documentation of the field, providing online communication tools, and developing unified public awareness and advocacy strategies.

---

LIST OF PARTICIPATING ORGANIZATIONS

_{*Denotes local sponsoring organizations}

ATLANTA, GA SESSION

• Appalshop
• Center for Documentary Studies at Duke University
• Georgia State University, Dept. of Film and Video
• High Museum of Art, Media Arts Program
• IMAGE Film and Video Center
• IndieMemphis
• University of Memphis, Dept. of Communication and Fine Arts
• Southern Arts Federation*

ALBANY, NY SESSION

• Association of Independent Video and Filmmaker
• Center for International Media Action
• Electronic Arts Intermix
• Experimental Television Center*
• free103point9
• Guggenheim Museum
• Hallwalls
• Harvestworks
• Independent Feature Project
• Independent Media Arts Preservation
• Institute for Electronic Arts at Alfred University
• The Kitchen
• Mediarights.org
• Manhattan Neighborhood Network
• New York State Council on the Arts*
• Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute & iEAR Studios
• Rhizome
• Squeaky Wheel
• Third World Newsreel
• Visual Studies
• WAMC*
• Woodstock Film Festival

 

COLUMBUS, OH SESSION

• 20,000 Leagues Under the Industry
• Allied Media Conference
• Antioch College
• Appalachian Media Access Center
• Athens International Film Festival
• Clamor Magazine
• Cleveland State University
• Columbus International Film & Video Festival
• Contemporary Arts Center
• Film Council of Greater Columbus
• Hilliard High School
• Independent Pictures
• Media Bridges Cincinnati
• PRYME Youth Media
• Rohauer Collection
• Wexner Center for the Arts*

LINCOLN, NE SESSION

• Battle Wagon Productions
• Cooper Foundation
• Field of Visions
• Hot Shops Film Festival
• Labor Market Information Center
• Lew Hunter's Indian Summer Screenwriting Colony
• Mary Riepma Ross Media Arts Center*
• Metropolitan Community College
• Mid America Arts Alliance
• Midwest Locations
• Native American Public Telecommunications
• Nebraska Arts Council
• Nebraska Department of Economic Development
• Nebraska Educational Telecommunications
• Nebraska Film Office
• Nebraska Independent Film Project
• Oklahoma City Museum of Art
• Omaha Weekly
• University of Nebraska, Lincoln
• University of Nebraska, Omaha

 

---

PAULA MANLEY is an organization development consultant, working with nonprofit groups and public agencies, and co-founder of The Learning Commons, devoted to nurturing public spaces and community-based leadership.

---

© 2005 National Alliance for Media Arts and Culture. All Rights Reserved.