Blog Archives

Museums are beloved by many, and as such, there is an incredibly large community of social media users with an affinity towards museums and cultural institutions. Over the past five years of my own social media usage, I’ve recognized the following three museum industry influencers: Colleen Dilen, Tyler Green, and Museum Nerd.

Although Colleen Dilen has the fewest followers of the three, I listed her first because her focus is particularly interesting to me. Colleen (@cdilly on Twitter) uses data to help non-profits ensure success by improving visitation, engagement, and more through data-driven adjustments and approaches. She is one of the few people in this niche field that shares her data openly and often, and her blog, Know Your Own Bone is a tremendous and thought-provoking resource.

Tyler Green (@TylerGreenDC on Twitter) is an art critic, blogger, and podcast host/producer of Modern Art Notes. With over 26,000 followers on Twitter, Tyler is a well-respected art critic and is constantly engaging both his followers and museums in critical discuss about exhibitions, publications, and other arts and museum related content on his dynamic Twitter feed.

Museum Nerd (@MuseumNerd on Twitter) is an anonymous Brooklyn resident who really, really likes museums. A self-proclaimed museum nerd, Museum Nerd posts to their website when they have more to say than a 140 letter tweet can handle. Museum Nerd has an impressive following of over 240,000 followers, and they post content that is in any way related to museums. Not to mention, they are also quite humorous! (I hope to find out who this mysterious funny person is some day.)

Museums and Cultural Institutions don’t engage with influencers in the way a typical for-profit company or business might. Instead, museums should look to people like the three aforementioned influencers as valuable resources and potential partners. If an organization interacts with an influencer and the influencer begins to see and appreciate the institution’s content, there is a chance the influencer will eventually share some of your content. This will push your content out to an entirely new audience. Influencers share good content, though, so it is crucial that the content your museum or cultural institution creates and posts on social media is something that people will be excited to share with others

Image via Jeffrey on Flickr

Image via Jeffrey on Flickr

Social media and Web 2.0 tools have changed the landscape of marketing dramatically in recent years. Popular social media sites, such as Facebook and Twitter, have an impressive amount of daily users from around the world. Consumers are able to give immediate feedback about their experiences, interact with people who share similar interests, and reach out to companies and organizations with the click of a button. The conversation is now almost entirely driven by the customer instead of the content creator, which can be a scary thing for a conservative institution.

Museums and cultural institutions and the lovers of these organizations, engage in social media as well. Instead of referring to “customers,” however, museums and cultural institutions engage with visitors, members, donors, and people who are passionate about the institution’s mission. Museums use social channels to promote events, share their collections, keep current constituents engaged, and reach new audiences.

One of the most important foundations of social media marketing is telling your story and telling it well. This is particularly relevant for museums and cultural organizations. An article published in the Washington post from June of 2014 boasted that there were more museums in the United States than there were Starbucks and McDonald’s locations…combined.

At over 35,000 museums and counting, there is an incredible variety of cultural organizations for people to choose from. This is why telling your story is essential and incredibly valuable. It is important for museums to share their message, story, and mission to inform people about what makes your organization special and why they should choose to visit and support your institution.

Museums and cultural institutions should focus on spreading their mission and telling their story on social media to make them standout of the crowd. Every organization has something that makes it special, and if you are able to communicate this effectively over social media your institution will benefit.

                 I’m a weird person. People have been describing me as weird since I can remember, though I’ve always wondered if it was just because our elementary school vocabularies were so limited that no one could ever think of another word for the “W” in my last name when making those anagram projects. Even still, I’ve always been described as “weird,” though often followed up by a “but in a good way.” One of my weirder qualities is that I don’t really like television and movies. I rarely ever want to go to the movies, and I honestly cannot recall when I actually got excited about a movie that was coming out. I’d often get dragged to midnight showings, but I could have cared less whether or not I was actually there. I also feel asleep in the theater during the most recent Die Hard movie, and no, I wasn’t even tired before I got there. I just don’t care.

                I grew up with a father who was on the cutting edge of all technology. I was also an only child. We always had at least 300 more channels that the three of us could possibly watch, but they were there just in case we needed them. In middle school, my parents let me have a TV in my bedroom. What did I chose to watch? The Home Shopping Network and Nick at Nite. No joke. I was obsessed with I Love Lucy, Green Acres, and Mary Tyler Moore, which in my opinion didn’t hold a candle to Rugrats, Hey Dude, and Salute Your Shorts, which I watched with my friends during the day. I never watched a show regularly, except for maybe TGIF, which was a family affair. I couldn’t be bothered to have to sit in front of the TV at a certain time – and I definitely still can’t!

                In high school we got satellite TV, and my obsessions became the Game Show Network and the Food Network. Once again, not joking. To this day, I have never seen an episode of Dawson’s Creek, The OC, One Tree Hill, Laguna Beach, or The Hills. I didn’t care. At all. Despite the fact that I didn’t particularly enjoy TV, I still felt like I had to have it on. I think it was for the background noise, or just due to the fact that that seemed like the normal thing to do. Throughout my entire life it has been incredibly hard for me to JUST watch TV. I always have to be doing something else: surfing the internet, making dinner, knitting, eating… anything other than just sitting there. As a result, I barely even pay attention to the TV. It’s become rarely anything more than a box of colors and sounds that I instinctively tune out and don’t pay attention to.

                Now that I am living away from my family and with my pretty frugal boyfriend, we decided not to get cable. I think this was one of the best decisions ever, because I am not paying for lights and sounds that I don’t pay attention to anyway. I get the local channels if I want to catch up on the news or, on occasion, watch the few shows I really do enjoy: How I Met Your Mother, Jeopardy, and The Ellen Show.  The shows that I enjoy that are not on antenna TV are easily accessed on the internet, and we decided to get Verizon Fios for just that reason. Quality high speed internet > cable TV. Now I just waste my time on the computer instead of as a zombie in front of the TV, but I’d like to think that my time spent on the computer is exponentially more productive. Whatever helps me sleep at night, right?

I’ve noticed that art that makes commentary on the body/involves the body leaves the most lasting impression on me. I guess this post is about unpacking these images, films, occurrences, etc. and figuring out exactly why and how I have such a visceral response to them.

From previous blog posts, I’ve made it largely apparent that I am fascinated with the idea of the spectacle. In this instance, I will also be using the word “spectacle” as defined by the Situations and Letterists International, both examples here taken from Guy Debord’s Society of the Spectacle:

33.

“Though separated from what they produce, people nevertheless produce every detail of their world with ever-increasing power. They thus also find themselves increasingly separated from that world. The closer their life comes to being their own creation, the more they are excluded from that life.”

35.

“The fetishism of the commodity — the domination of society by “intangible as well as tangible things” — attains its ultimate fulfillment in the spectacle, where the real world is replaced by a selection of images which are projected above it, yet which at the same time succeed in making themselves regarded as the epitome of reality.”

I will also be expanding on the notion of spectacle with what it particularly means to me, which is a hybrid between the ideologies of the SI/LI and the dictionary definition of: “something exhibited to view as unusual, notable, or entertaining; especially : an eye-catching or dramatic public display.” For me, the spectacle, in relation to the body, involves using the body (with or without consent of the person) as something to be viewed or provide pleasure and/or entertainment. The two examples of the body as spectacle that come to my mind are “ethnographic” presentations of people and pornography. Yes, they seem pretty unrelated right now, but bear with me.

The practice of displaying people is centuries old. Particularly after the colonization of Oceania, the Americas, and Africa “indigenous” people were sent back to Europe for display at fairs as “ethnographic displays.” The most well known example of this is the Hottentot Venus, an African woman who was sent to Europe as a “specimen” due to her engorged secondary sexual characteristics and “odd” (not European) aesthetics. A brilliant commentary on this practice is Coco Fusco and Guillermo Gómez –Peña’s performance piece circa 1997, The Couple in the Cage. This piece, which is one of my favorite performance pieces, shows the injustice and continuance of these practices. We’d like to believe that these practices no longer exist, that humans are not turned into spectacles, but think back to the last time you visited your favorite art or natural history museum. Remember that Ancient Egyptian mummy? Yeah, that is a human body. I know; it’s easy to forget.

Now what do “ethnographic displays” and mummies in museums have to do with pornography? Well, in these adult videos bodies are on display – in this case, not really as specimens, but as objects of pleasure and enjoyment. I guess in some ways it is not THAT much different than the theater or cinema, in which actors and actresses use their bodies and talents to entertain. I think what, in my mind, connects pornography with the display of bodies is the degrading and careless way in which many of its subjects are treated. Discussing pornography also provides an excellent transition to my next topic: the body as commodity.

When discussing the body as commodity, all that I can think of is prostitution and sex slavery. Once again, two very different things, though they are really only differentiated by one, rather important aspect: consent. My first experience unpacking the body as commodity and commentary on prostitution was exploring Picasso’s Demoiselles D’Avignon. In Picasso’s fragmented cubist painting, he is making a harsh commentary on the barbarous nature of selling one’s body for money. Particularly commenting on the crude behavior of seemingly sophisticated Parisian life in the early 20th century, which was rampant with prostitution and sexually transmitted diseases, Picasso uses the notion of primitivism to criticize the Western world, rather than the common practice of using primitivism to denigrate non-European (and therefore inferior) cultures. Though the female subjects of Picasso’s painting, as prostitutes, are choosing to be commodities, their bodies are shattered, their faces are ugly; they are far from beautiful or inviting, which was (and still is) the common glamorization of sex for sale.

I’ve had many debates over whether or not prostitution is a symbol of barbarism for a culture, of whether or not prostitution as an economic function of society, as an unsightly byproduct of capitalism somehow justifies its existence. To me, the body used as spectacle, but particularly turned into commodity can only be explained by this quote by Walter Benjamin: “there is no document of civilization that is not simultaneously a document of barbarism.” In my mind, prostitution is as disturbing as sex trafficking and it is the physical manifestation of a culture’s barbarity. It is the underbelly of a culture that is in denial of its own primitivism.