I have the distinct pleasure of being in Daniel’s class this fall, Museums and Technology.  While it is surprising for my classmates that I would take a class about something I do already, I am excited for the opportunity to explore more thoroughly the meaning of technology for the museum experience and how the visitor is affected by these changes. I see continual parallels between issues encountered with visitors in physical space and issues we are encountering all over again in our digital spaces. I’ve talked about Twitter before and I have been thinking about how it is harnessed by museums and where we are going wrong.

We were talking about Twitter again in a recent class, more specifically what we consider to be a successful museum tweet, and why. It’s very hard to nail down, and even harder to do. The main reason is because it’s so hard to avoid becoming a marketing ploy, something which happens without rapt attention. A museums use of twitter now stands as an analogy for the way the actual museum interacts with its visitors and the traditional barrier between the inner workings of an institution and the public at large. So many museums need to release their stranglehold on twitter feeds to actually let interesting information get out.

I was at the Indianapolis Greek Festival this past weekend, and I couldn’t help to think that they were doing something right.

There were throngs of people, tons of Greek food, everyone jostling and yelling and having a great time, but here’s the part that baffled me- you had to pay to get in, and the food was delicious, but quite pricey. What is the Holy Trinity parish doing that connects so much with their audience that museums cannot seem to do? I think we can be the Agora marketplace discussed by Dr. Steven Zucker (@drszucker) and Dr. Nancy Proctor (@nancyproctor) a vibrant place for community and discussion, in the same way that the Greek festival is. I think the problem is balance- how do we sell ourselves as experts in our field while maintaining that we want everyone else’s opinion, too?

Some people are getting it right, figuring out how to sift through all the noise and clutter to connect with their audience while maintaining their voice. One such person is the British musician Imogen Heap, who felt a divide between herself and her fans before she started to utilize blogs and Twitter, not dissimilar to the separation between and institution and it’s community. In a recent interview with Melissa Block on NPR, she describes the divide quite succinctly. She then discusses what it’s like to have that direct connection throughout the process of making her music.

It’s been so amazing. I’ve always struggled with this barrier that I felt like I’d had up until blogging came along. Just one comment from somebody really sparks something in me. It doesn’t need to be this huge wall between me and the listeners anymore. I really thrive on that.”

@ImogenHeap gets it- the audience has become part of the process, and there’s no going back.

OK, not so much a fight, as a discussion. And when I say ‘in public’ I mean on my Facebook wall.

It all started when I retweeted @anarchivist (see below) and then it ended up on my Facebook page too. Anyway, the ‘discussion’ played out like this:

ME: I agree. RT @anarchivist hates the phrase “social media.” all online media is inherently social even if you dont want it to be.

Ben: to be social is to have an understanding or acknowledgment between two or more people. so then simply watching a movie on line would not be considered social but definitely media.
Wed at 2:33pm

ME: but what if you can comment and/or share that video with your friends using FB, Twitter, etc?
Wed at 2:41pm

Ben: that is social. but watching the movie and commenting on it are two separate things. right?
Wed at 2:56pm

ME: but the fact that it exists online DOES mean that. The fact that it has potential to be shared makes it social.
Wed at 3:50pm

The argument ended there. But did I win it?

Let’s take a look at what good old Wikipedia has to say:

Social media is online content created by people using highly accessible and scalable publishing technologies. Social media is a shift in how people discover, read and share news, information and content; it’s a fusion of sociology and technology, transforming monologues (one to many) into dialogues (many to many) and is the democratization of information, transforming people from content readers into publishers.

I agree with Ben that the simple act of watching a video online is not social. But because of the way the web had evolved,  now any media that exists online can be social media, whether it was intended to be used that way or not. An article, picture, or video is posted and you can share it numerous ways (email it, Facebook it, Twitter it, Digg it, etc.)

Or is my friend right? Are they two completely different things? Maybe the real question here is why are we so eager to label everything? The IMA is always on the look out for cutting edge ways to interact with with the public. Call them trends, call them buzzwords, call them The Next Big Thing… we’ve employed just about every ’social media’ tactic that makes sense (and it’s working!)  So maybe it doesn’t matter and if it works, it works.

I’m not sure why anarchivist’s statement and the resulting debate got me so riled up, but maybe the ‘anythings possible’ sentiment of ‘all online media is social media’ simply gives me the warm-fuzzies.

Please comment below and help me prove my friend wrong, er… help us sort things out so we can look each other in the eye again.

In the recent days, I have watched and listened as social media innovates political process in Iran. Twitter has been a powerful forum for a newsfeed out of the country, allowing people to photograph, video and blog about events in real time, even as more traditional journalists are being asked to leave.

Listening to a segment about it on the radio, I couldn’t help but think about the massive change to how news is found and the way crowdsourcing of information has so drastically changed the source of the news we get, and for museums, how closely this is tied to the changing face of visitor interactions through the web. Nina Simon, in this article at Museum2.0, writes,

For people who are deeply immersed in social media, social networks are already a much heavier influence on personal choices–where to visit, what concert to attend–than traditional advertising. Which means that your organization’s website–a brochure out in the wilderness of the Web–is only going to remain relevant and useful as a marketing piece if it is being referenced in the social context of your users’ lives.

Different people and institutions have found vastly different approaches to garnering information from their audiences.

Some museums have decided to use crowdsourcing, which can be appealing to visitors, in a way that is helpful to what the museum wants to accomplish. The Brooklyn Museum’s Shelley Bernstein wrote about a new project called Freeze Tag! where Brooklyn decided to utilize their loyal taggers to help control errant or incorrect information. Putting control back in the hands of the visitor can be risky, but, like Wikipedia, ultimately a project where passionate people and the wisdom of crowds wins out in the end. Brooklyn is a leader in integrating the visitor into the museums practice in innovative ways. With or without social media, how can other museums use this model to further their own goals?

Certainly, insta-media has increased the demand for transparency. Last week, Tyler Green and Christopher Knight tweeted and blogged about the dubious ethics in a private sale of works of art at the Orange County Museum of Art. These exchanges led to a heated discussion of the readers of the respected entries, including people representing both sides of the argument, and lots of scrutiny at the museum. Did the museum miss a chance to lead these discussions in the first place?

The problems start when the institution places itself on these social media sites, but don’t seem ready to hear what their devoted fan have to say. Douglas McLennan, of  Diacritical says,

…traditional PR notices are not only ineffective in this new era of many-to-many communication, but can make things worse. And what might have been a real opportunity to meaningfully engage this community has been lost.

Can a museum be listening all the time? In the world of public relations and standards, the casual conversation style of the Facebook world must seem completely alien.

The voice of the audience has never been as available to museums as it is now. Museums small and large have been all over Facebook and Twitter, my social media outlets of choice, trying to add fans and establish a voice that is cohesive with the museum’s image. Let’s imagine there is a museum out there doing it all perfectly. They generate lots of discussion and suggestions from their core audience of loyal visitors and donors…. What now? This next step is crucial and the point of getting involved in social media in the first place, and it is up to each museum.  How and when is that museum going to listen?

It’s my hope that we will continue to see the flowering of visitors being welcomed into the museum conversation, worldwide, with social media just being an example of ways to welcome them into the rest of the practices in the institution. If we want the community to value our institutions, we can strengthen the relationship by showing how much we value them.

Me (as a blond) and Kyle at Pitchfork Fest 08

But this year, don’t forget your iPhone. Web 2.0, social media, new media… musicians, concert venues, and music festivals are all jumping on the ‘interactive’ bandwagon.

As if crowd surfing wasn’t interactive enough.

Obviously, SXSW has been the leader in merging music and technology (click here to read Daniel’s post from 2008’s festival), but more and more, other fests are forced to think out of the proverbial box.

Voice too hoarse to shout your request? No worries, Pitchfork Fest is giving ticket buyers the opportunity to name the set list of their favorite bands online. This year’s headliners The Flaming Lips said they “will do their best to accommodate the wildest and most obscure of request– covers included.”

Photo by David Donovan Evans

And from what I’ve read in the news, it all seems to be working. Despite the recession, music festivals are thriving.

Photo by David Donovan Evans

To what do they attribute this success? According to this internet marketing blog, “MySpace has long been a popular social network within the music industry. Artists often preview new albums on the site, for example. When it comes to these concerts, however, MySpace doesn’t generate nearly the engagement of Facebook, or even Twitter or email.”

One of my most favorite new media + music mash ups of all time is the All Eyes series from CurrentTV. Check out the fan-sourced video of My Morning Jacket at Lollapalooza.

This really gets my gears turning about possible ways we can apply these new media/social media stategies to the programming here at the IMA for The Toby and Summer Nights, or other events at the museum. How have you seen social media used effectivley at a concert, festival, or event?

Web 2.0 logos from Flickr user stabilo boss

Lucky for me, social media has become an integral part of the way museums create an interactive experience for the museum visitor, especially here at the IMA.

That said, we at the IMA would like to invite all our blog readers and fellow bloggers to peel your eyes from the computer screens for one night, and put a face to the local blogs you love to read. (Don’t worry, we’ll have wi-fi so you can live-blog and tweet to your heart’s content!)

Come one, come all...

And now, just for fun, The top signs you have a Blogging Problem: {Comment below with your own (probably more) witty ‘top signs…’}

• After 5 minutes of meeting someone you ask, “So… do you blog?”
• You make plans and decision based on whether they are ‘blog-worthy’
• You get more “approve this comment” e-mail messages than spam
• You only stay at hotels with broadband or with a Starbucks within 3 blocks
• People worry about you when you do not post for a day
• You’ve started to resemble this guy:

RSS feed tattoo from Flickr user shizhao

For more absurd blogger tattoos, click here. Obsessed with Facebook? In need of a Twittervention? You’re invited too… See you on Friday!

Our timing could of probably been better considering the outlandish and annoying mainstream media coverage over these past few weeks. Just last Friday, Twitter almost had the Best Week Ever (@BWEtv), it was featured on a segment of the Daily Show, and you can’t seem to turn on the news with out hearing a lame joke about tweeting. Don’t be surprised if your grandma starts following you!

The problem I see now is that every organization is jumping in and using it as a marketing tool mostly. The fact is, it can be a great marketing tool, but if you abuse it for that purpose you’re probably going to lose followers in a hurry. If it didn’t work for your blog, it’s definitely not going to work on Twitter. Just my 2 cents.

I’ll be quick to admit, I didn’t get it in the beginning, and I’m sort of late on the tweet train even though I’ve had a Twitter account open for a while now. But I must say, I am a believer! I’m going to try make an effort to give a better look behind the scenes at the IMA over the next few weeks as I hone my skills.

If your not sold like I wasn’t, I’ve compiled a list of links that should give you reason enough to join in on the revolution and hopefully explain what and why better.

10 things to make you a Twitter rock star (in no particular order):

• Just Tweet It – Find other Twitter users like you! You can search directories and add your name to the pool of users as well.
• Mr. Tweet – Your personal Twitter networking assistant. Follow @MrTweet and watch your followers grow.
• TweetDeck – This is an amazing free Adobe Air application. If your checking tweets on the internet, you ain’t seen nothing yet. This desktop app takes tweets to another level.
• 12seconds – Well, they say tweeting is micro-blogging, so this micro-video site is a great companion if you want to share micro-videos via Twitter.
• Nearby Tweets – A great tool to see what people near you in proximity are tweeting about. This might creep some people out, but I love it.
• Twitter Backgrounds Gallery – Show off your design skills or get inspiration from this showcase site of unique Twitter backgrounds.
• Cligs – Short URLs with analytics!
• The ReTweetability Index – A list of users based on infectious power of their tweets.
• Twitter Grader – Get your Twitter ranking.
• Twitter Start Pack – Your Starter Pack for great marketing, advertising, PR and social media people to follow on Twitter.

Be sure to read Phil’s post from last week on the subject.

What am I missing here? Comment or tweet at me, @mattgipson. This is my first and last post on Twitter… I promise.

As of this month, at the ripe old age of five, it’s ancient in Web 2.0 terms. But for being a senior citizen of the web, Facebook sure has managed to stay fresh and relevant. What started as a social experiment in Mark Zuckerberg’s Harvard dorm room has grown to capture over 150 million users.

icanhascheezburger.com

Here are some ways Facebook has managed to grow and adapt so far…

-  its supernatural ability to help you reconnect with old high school buddies, network  professionally (ahem), plan killer bashes, and showcase your wit via status message

- the ever-growing collection of third-party Facebook applications, integration with Twitter, built-in Instant Messaging, blog importation capability, and more

These all allow users to express themselves in a rather addictive way.

Here at the IMA, we utilize Social Networking to reach a more diverse and (presumably) younger audience.  And, like any institution, we are always looking for ways to stay fresh and relevant.

However, TIME ’s tech writer, Lev Grossman makes a humorous argument as to why Facebook is for ‘Old Fogies.’  After all, Facebook’s fastest-growing demographic are those 30+. Could this be the kiss-of-death?

Illustration by John Cuneo for TIME

Others are predicting Facebook’s demise. Blogger Devin Johnston argues that unless Facebook changes drastically, it will fizzle out in just three years.

Sites like Facebook are doomed unless they radically alter their business and development models to reflect the needs, interests, and capabilities of internet users. There is room for Facebook to move away from providing service and toward assembling the services of others in a single location. Frankly, I think that this is the only way that Facebook will survive the coming revolution in social computing.

That’s a lot to ask of a five year old.

Do YOU think Facebook’s days are numbered? Will it continue to adapt, or be wiped out by something better-faster-stronger?

Here’s the link to Lunder’s Twitter Site.  I’ve been following them since I first saw that blog post; I also follow a few other people: one of my brothers, a friend, an artist, and so on.  I’ve never posted anything to my Twitter account, but I do update my “status” on my Facebook account somewhat frequently, which is a lot like using Twitter.  Who knows why it so compelling to let my “friends” know what I’m up to, but I do it.

I hope by this point you’re asking yourself why the Lunder Center (or anyone) is tweeting or updating their facebook status.  Because that’s what I’ve been asking myself recently.  Why are we interested in doing this?  Are we deepening the way we communicate; or is the way we are communicating, searching, reading, and surfing on the internet changing us?  In the end I think this is the more interesting question: how is technology changing the way we think?

With Linda’s post last week and then Damon Darlin’s article, Technology Doesn’t Dumb Us Down. It Frees Our Minds in the NYT, which was a response to Nicholas Carr’s Atlantic Monthly article Is Google Making Us Stupid?, I’ve been kicking these thoughts around recently.

Of course, I don’t really have any answers, and I trust you weren’t expecting them from me.  To pair all of this down to a sentence or two: I don’t think technology is making us stupid, and, well, I really don’t think it’s making us any smarter.  But I am thrilled to be at this moment when technology is opening doors that were previously closed, showing us into parts of the museum (and every other part of society) that were previously off limits, and allowing us to collaborative work together on projects that are greater than each individual.

Listen to Clay Shirky at the 2008 Web 2.0 Expo talk about “waking up from the collective bender” we’ve been having on our free time and you’ll know what I mean.  I for one agree with him about the idea of “carving out a bit of the cognitive surplus” and putting it to good use.  And of course agree that it’s better to do something rather than to do nothing with “free time” (one of his arguments I find a bit tough: that playing World of Warcraft is more productive than watching a sitcom like The Office).

So, maybe this is why I’m so interested in following museum projects with Twitter, or why I’m willing blog for the IMA, read other conservation blogs, work on Wikipedia projects, or fool with Facebook (mind you I really don’t mess with any of these things while I’m here at the IMA, I’m just too busy with the “work” work I do. Honestly, that’s the truth.  I do all that stuff at home, on my free time.). I’m willing to do it because it’s doing something not nothing.  (Another side note here, the other weekend I made an application in Facebook that allows you to send art conservation tools to your friends – because they may need them.  I’ll let you be judge if this is doing something or doing nothing.)

I remember sometime ago when Tyler Green over at Modern Art Notes announced  that he was on Facebook, but then said “Not sure what I’ll do with it, but I’m open to suggestions.”  (Yes, he’s on also Twitter .)   Yeah, “open to suggestions.”  Me too.  I think that’s a big difference: it seems everyone and everything is now open for suggestions or discussion, or is just plain open. This is a change in thinking.  I think this proves that technology has the potential to free our minds, not make us more stupid.

I feel a need to bring this back to art conservation because, in the end, that’s what I do and what I’m nominally supposed to be writing about.  Using technology to talk about conservation or work on conservation projects has plenty of positives.  And doing it in an open way has the potential to get more people involved and make the work that we are doing in the museum more accessible.  Do I think using Twitter to let you have up-to-the-minute updates on what the conservators are doing on projects is a good idea?  I don’t know, and I don’t think I’ll be up for answering that anytime soon (unless, of course, the Nugget Factory decides to pony up the money to cover my cell phone data plan to let me experiment with it).

Finally, then, I’d like to take this post in a slightly different but related direction and end with another question: how does all of this technology and accessibility change our understanding of and interest in art?  I’m fairly certain that all of the art in the IMA’s collection has nothing to do with you sitting at home looking at a computer screen; you have to come here to see it.  Because I work in conservation, I’m reminded on a daily basis that art is a physical thing: it has dimension, occupies space, and in some ways is living a life here at the IMA.  A flat, glowing screen can’t relay this kind of information; art must be viewed and experienced in person.

Here’s my attempt to reduce this to a tweet: “Richard McCoy is unsure how technology influences viewing art.”