New research on digital audiences from ACE, A&B, MLA

Arts Council England, Arts & Business and the MLA have just release this important new report as part of ACE's Digital Opportunity research programme:

Digital audiences: engagement with arts and culture online

There's lots of encouraging evidence of people's digital and cultural lives, and positive conclusions which make the case for the cultural sector's digital future.

Some thoughts/reactions from a folly perspective:

1) Online engagement  as complement rather than replacement comes through very strongly, and the report puts a very strong case across for things like Love Culture

2) The report says:

“– Digital technology should be seen primarily as a means to reach out to those who are already culturally aware
– There is no evidence that digital technology in and of itself offers a way to engage people with little or no current interest in arts and culture.”

I would question  this as a blanket conclusion - and I think it's to do with how the evidence would have been collected and what those questioned would have thought to include in their answers. People are doing lots of new and creative things with digital technology, but wouldn't class it as "participating in arts and culture", and don't necessarily connect it to any more traditional arts activities that they may or may not do -  one obvious example being makers/hackers/tinkerers bedroom/garage/workshop hobbyists. (See also my next point about categorisations)

Also I think something that is really important, but not touched on in this report at all really, is the reverse of the second point, in terms of the arts and positive social change, i.e does art and culture in and of itself offers a way in to engage people with little or no current interest in digital technology?

3) Their categorisation of art forms is pretty standard/traditional, although the report makes the important point about “ the (sadly few) genuinely immersive and participative arts and cultural experiences that are already available online”, and states that “there is an appetite for the sector to innovate and create a new generation of experiences that take advantage of some of the internet's unique characteristics – however challenging that may be given the current economic climate.” Which is really great to see.

However we still need more about these “new generation of experiences”, e.g:

• In the list of survey options for activities done online, there are options like "watched a recording of a performance" and "used the internet to create something", but nothing at all like experiencing a work of art that's native to the web.
• Of the five main categories the report uses to describe different online interactions "experience" is described as "an activity where the user is experiencing the full creative or artistic work online. This is distinct from viewing a clip as part of the 'access' process as the individual has chosen to take the experience itself online", but then the section expanding on this focuses on recordings of live performance...
• The report suggests “positioning online experiences as distinct from the live offer could help to manage audience expectations by ensuring that the two are seen as complementary rather than substitutive. The success of online gaming also provides pointers for arts and cultural organisations seeking immersive and participative ways of engaging their audiences.” This only scratches the surface of the potential of the internet for participative engagement, and doesn't really even touch on creative uses of digital technology and networks beyond what is basically just web browsing or tied to standard conceptions of how we supposed to use computers (and mobile devices). I can't help thinking that stopping using the performing arts as the starting point for comparisons would help move this sort of thinking forward.