A couple weeks ago I came across a webpage where an author was encouraging people to buy his book and had links to Amazon, Barnes and Noble and Powells. Since following any link would allow you to buy the same product, I started to wonder if choosing to buy from a certain bookseller was a personal statement.

While an author would want to offer people the most options to purchase their book, it is clearly not in his/her best interest to link to Amazon because they won’t receive any money on sales of the large stock of used editions Amazon makes available.

I have read some screeds on the internet about why one store is more evil than another but I haven’t read enough to justify a theory that people feel like they are making a statement when they buy from a certain bookstore.

When you shop in Tiffany’s or carry an iconic blue bag, people can see you and be impressed. What you are reading might say something about you, but if you buy a book online, unless you are carrying the box it came in around with you, the source of the book you are reading on the bus is invisible. As the purchasers, you know where it came from and perhaps you derive pleasure from your association with the place of purchase.

I don’t think there is a question that people are motivated to do things by factors that will never receive external recognition. I have recently been pondering if there is a way arts organizations can structure the choices they offer people in a way that allows them to make a personal statement even though the ultimate result is no different from the person standing next to them.

For awhile credit card companies were emphasizing choice of card art, payment date and rewards plan as an individual decision. Other than the art, no one at the cash register had any inkling about what choices you had made unless you started tallying aloud how many frequent flier miles you were racking up.

The obvious choice for arts organizations might be donation options which benefit really specific areas with which the donor might identify and privately recognize. No one else in the audience may know or care, but that Fresnel on the first electric is there because of you baby!

In many ways, this is too easy and probably ignores other opportunities. It has also been done to death in many other forms like adopt a seat and cobblestone campaigns. It is hard to imagine other options because it is difficult to know what secretly motivates our patrons’ choices and the Internet allows them even more privacy by circumventing the Tiffany’s building and bags altogether.

It wouldn’t surprise me if organizations started to tap into some obvious sources of personal statements and advertise that building renovations had earned some form of LEED certification in order to attract environmentally conscious individuals.

Eventually, that will become trite so the trick is to identify motivators with a similarly powerful appeal that aren’t quite so obvious that might be sincerely embraced. With all the arts organizations that create new programs just to get grant funding, the last thing groups need to do is replicate this mistake by hitching to a trend that isn’t compatible with their mission.

I have some irons in the fire but nothing has developed. I did want to note the inexplicable absence of Adaptistration from the ArtsJournal.com.

I am not a big symphony fan, but I do respect Drew’s writing and check him out every weekday morning. I was surprised to find the link to his blog gone today and upon typing in the blog’s URL, find myself redirected to Adaptistration’s new home at www.adaptistration.com.

I have dutifully changed the links on my home page. The links from my posts to Drew’s entries on Artsjournal.com are still active but I don’t know for how long.

In the absence of any post on either Artsjournal or the new Adaptistration regarding the change, my musing on the subject have run from the mostly benign scenario where Drew wants more control over the appearance of his blog. A more disturbing scenario has occurred to me where his assessments of orchestra websites and reporting on negotiations and revelations of other details have been welcome by many and they in turn have put pressure on Artsjournal editor Doug McLennan to reign Drew in.

The concept of the latter option has such chilling implications, I tend toward the former. Hopefully Drew will offer an explanation soon.

It bears noting that in the internet age, it can be important to get ahead of things by providing information about changes lest unfounded rumors start to emerge from idle speculations such as those offered above.

Yes, you can damn me for inconsistency by simultaneous noting this fact and posting idle speculation. But please note that most people don’t provide a disclaimer that allows you to damn them for inconsistency.