New Radicals

Today, I read about Julia Moulden, who has authored an idea called "New Radicals" about how regular, everyday people can change the work they do to make a living, to help save the world. She alludes to social entrepreneurship, but approaches everyone's ability to give back more broadly. I liked this column, where she poses six questions for "Emerging New Radicals" because as I read them, I found them quite similar to the questions I posed to myself when I decided to go to grad school for arts admin a couple years ago: How can I contribute seriously to the world I am a part of? What do I love to do, what am I good at, and what things meet both qualifications? Now, what do I need to do to get there? Answering these questions for myself keeps me focused. I want to be a festival director; because I believe art and community activity have the ability to greatly influence quality of life for many people; I like to organize, coordinate, think, plan, and execute. A graduate degree will give me good preparation to do these things, in both the title and knowledge it totes. Focusing on these questions also has prepared me with a decent response when people ask, "Arts what? Administration? Is that, like, museums?" I always happily explain, and almost always get, "Wow, what a cool job." I am so very fortunate to have found something I like, I'm decent at, and that makes a contribution.

Facebook and copyright law

A friend directed me to this article about Facebook.

Facebook, apparently, can use your photos, videos, or any other content you upload on your profile in any way they want, even after you deactivate your account.

Now I remember in Prof. Langvardt's class, I learned a copyright on creative work is applied automatically when the work is created. No one can use your work without your permission, of course, even if it's just facebook photos and you haven't registered for a copyright. You are automatically protected.

So I wonder about the legal intersection of these two policies. I'm sure Facebook is a responsibly run company and they wouldn't have legal policies that weren't well researched, and they're so high profile, it'd be too high of a PR liability if they were to actually use a user's photos inappropriately. But out of principle, I bet their users aren't aware what they're giving up rights to.

Perks to the economic downturn

An economic downturn rarely seems to be a good thing. Particularly in the art world, where we battle the idea of art being less than necessity.

And the downturn is hurting the art market, according to experts. BUT a couple of interesting perks were pointed out by artists in this video taken at a Guggenheim fundraising auction, on the New York Times website.

1) "People who are in it only for money get weeded out in a way, and there's a good side to that." So art can be purchased by true art lovers, rather than those just looking to make an investment. It seems artists like this idea. Rushton tells us they're not really in it for the money, anyway.

2) "When the prices are lower more museums and public institutions will be able to acquire them [pieces of art]." If more art is in museums and public institutions, more people are exposed to the art. If the art can only be afforded by mega-rich private individuals, fewer people have access to it. As administrators, I think we all generally believe better art access = better world.

Michelle Facos, beloved museum/art history professor, exposed us to the auction world last year. A highlight was a fieldtrip to Chicago and a visit to Sotheby's.

the Lovemark

I learned about the Lovemark from the PBS show, The Persuaders, about the multi-billion dollar advertising, PR, and marketing industry. We watched it for a marketing course, and have talked about it ever since.

The idea of the lovemark is this: People become emotionally attached to certain brands, inspiring “loyalty beyond reason.”

Lovemark brands are brands who spawn commitment among consumers, whose loyalists do not only like the product the company produces, but love the brand itself; what it stands for, the personality it embodies, and what they feel it says about them that they affiliate themselves with the brand.

Examples include Apple, Jeep, Target, Louis Vuitton, or Harley-Davidson.

(You hear people say “I am a Mac person.” This does not just mean they use apple computers; but rather it suggests an identity expression of the type of person they see themselves as being.)

Sports teams are a strong example. Being a Detroit Redwings fan is not just about hockey, it’s about a whole culture. A ticketmaster executive, speaking in one of our classes the other day, said there is a forty-thousand-some waitlist for Greenbay Packers tickets; talk about loyalty.

Tying this to arts, a classmate brought up the fact that in Europe, people feel loyalty to their local arts organizations, the way we feel loyalty toward sports teams here in the US. I want to know this: what is the formula that inspires loyalty, for a non-profit organization? A strong brand image? Just great marketing?

Are there some arts organizations that have captured it here in the US? Like the MET? By what strategy? And how can we incite this kind of loyalty in to our own organizations? If not only for moral support, our financial future would certainly be more steady with lovemark status.

How do we become a lovemark?