Another set of stories referenced in the Arts Midwest newsletter was about a 2024 pilot grant program they had started to support 10 Midwest media groups’ capacity to tell stories of arts and culture.
One of the groups expanded arts coverage to rural Ohio counties they hadn’t reported from before. Another explored Lucha Libre’s role in helping collect the stories of Mexican immigrants in Iowa. Another series covered non-traditional and living maps in the Midwest. There were some quirky, but interesting and inventive topics covered. If you are intrigued, visit the project page.
The story project that really drew me in was Buffalo’s Fire reporting on dentalium shells. The shells are tusk shaped and were highly prized by a broad range of American Indian tribes in the Midwest. Since the shells were found on the shores of the Pacific Northwest, there was a robust trade that occurred. However, pandemics, armed conflict, and displacement broke up the trade routes.
The interesting twist on the story is that currently the trade is Indian to Indian–as in the sub-continent of India to American Indians. Fisherman in India are supplying the shell to American Indians. Buffalo’s Fire went to India and made a video interviewing some of these fisherman.
There are a half dozen stories and a few audio interviews discussing the traditional and current use of the shells, where to buy them, the history of the trade, the biology of the shells, etc.
One of the stories mentioned that the supply from the Pacific Northwest is limited today. I was wondering why the supply couldn’t be re-established domestically. I wasn’t clear if that was due to it not being economically worthwhile to harvest or perhaps something related to change of climate and habitat.
Clearly, that interesting connection between Indians and the misnamed indigenous people of North America piqued my interest in exploring deeper and Buffalo’s Fire provided a good range of content.
Came across a press release about a study conducted on Gen Z and Millennial perceptions of Broadway. The provocative title suggested that Broadway wasn’t overpriced, but rather undervalued. According to the study’s sponsors, No Guarantees Productions, once people learn everything that goes into a Broadway production, the amount they are willing to pay increases.
While many of the study participants indicated they were cutting back on their spending due to economic uncertainty, they were open to spending on experiences shared with friends vs. things. This has been a trending sentiment across many studies, especially since the scaling down of pandemic restrictions. These experiences are perceived to provide a greater emotional return on investment than purchasing things affords.
The study includes direct responses from participants and really illustrated the amount of thought people were putting into curating these experiences for others. Some people were thinking about the music a friend/family member liked, others wanted to take friends to their first Broadway show and were thrilled to provide friends with their first theater attendance experience ever.
As seen in the chart below, the study used a number of prompts to determine how much people were willing to pay to see a Broadway show, then provided the context of the expense for a typical vacation trip, then provided the context of how much it cost to run a Broadway show each week. With the addition of each bit of context, the amount people were willing to pay increased from $141 to $286 to $512.
This does align with previous findings that people are more interested in purchasing goods or experiences if there is an engaging story associated with it.
While respondents said they would attend more frequently if the tickets cost less, about 63% said that discounted tickets made them suspect the show’s quality was low or the seats were bad for some reason. No Guarantees suggested that discounting didn’t necessarily make a show more attractive.
In fact, some people responded they would rather pay a little extra to ensure they would have an enjoyable experience:
For Nikki, trading up for a more memorable experience trumps ticket price overall. She explains “If we’re going to spend money to go see a concert or game or a show, we’d rather spend the extra $100 and get the better seats and have the better experience than sit in a nosebleed section,”—a sentiment in line with the artisan economy and the intentionality people are prioritizing in experiences today.
One response type that was interesting to me was that the perception that Broadway shows run forever was resulting in a lack of urgency. I am sure it would dismay a lot of Broadway marketing teams to learn that it regardless of how much buzz they generate about the opening of a show, there are a lot of people who think they can always see it later.
Nikki is a great example of having high interest in Broadway, but low urgency to go to a show. “I would love to see Hamilton, it’s been on my list for a while. I hear it’s the most amazing show, but they’re not taking it off anytime soon. So, I just haven’t gotten around to getting tickets to go see it.”
It’s true that, relative to many other entertainment experiences, Broadway feels static. The perception that the same show that’s been playing for twenty years will go on for another twenty hinders the opportunity for attracting new audiences. This is particularly true at a time when a constant stream of new content has become an expectation for younger generations
No Guarantees suggests one solution for Broadway would be the creation of social clubs and locals-only events. One of the respondents said social clubs targeting her and her friends is what has gotten her to attend a number of events at Lincoln Center.
One thing to note is that most of the respondents were from the NYC area or tri-state region (NY, NJ, CT) with fewer from the national sphere. So many of them may have been plugged-in or at least highly aware of opportunities even if they indicated they didn’t attend frequently. While I imagine that people living in other parts of the US may have a similar perception of the value proposition and would be willing to pay more if they had similar context, the differing range of opportunities available and expectations about participation will likely impact the amount they would be willing to pay and degree to which they would engage.
Arts Midwest sent out their monthly newsletter this week which included stories they had published on their website during July. One of the pieces was a quick set of case studies of small arts organizations making efforts to prevent burn out among their staff and volunteers.
Another piece included three examples of arts organizations’ efforts to create community advisory committees. The experience of one organization in particular, 825 Arts, caught my attention because it emphasizes the importance of being specific when recruiting for committees. It is something that seems obvious, but is seldom recognized and put into practice.
Essentially, they tried to recruit a group to advise them about how best to serve the Frogtown and Rondo neighborhoods in St. Paul, Minnesota. They had a hard time recruiting and retaining people to the committee because people didn’t quite understand the purpose of the group.
Once they shifted their messaging and communication about the group, they saw more involvement.
…they changed the name of the group from “Community Engagement Committee” to “Neighborhood Dream Team.” The new name captured the spirit of the group’s new goals: dreaming and visioning on programs and their potential for their neighborhood.
They also decided to shift formats, engaging members through an ongoing text thread in addition to in-person meetings. The text thread allowed members to respond and contribute on their own time, while the bi-monthly meetings focused on larger proposals and the bigger picture.
825 Arts found success with their community advisory group by honoring members’ time, adapting to their preferred communication styles, and establishing a clear, shared goal.
Among the advice 825 had for others was to make sure people not only understand how they are contributing to the organization, but how those contributions have shaped the final result of things that have been implemented.
He addresses a number of topics, including balancing the mission and purposes of museums against their need to be sustainable. He gives a number of examples, including how the Met had spent seven years preparing a Michelangelo exhibit that was on display for three months. He says it advanced the mission of the museum, but was not a good financial decision.
It was interesting to get his perspective on this balance. Especially since during his tenure The Met made the controversial decision to eliminate the pay-what-you-wish admission fee for anyone who didn’t live in New York. Weiss talks about how he had enjoyed free admission at the National Gallery when he was an undergraduate in Washington, D.C., and how when he attended Yale, the director of Yale University Art Gallery argued the Met should be free given how wealthy it was.
However, he said once he took the helm of the Met, he discovered the budgets were more constrained than most people imagined. Apparently admission revenue had declined by 67% over the previous decade.
He was also faced with a significant amount of deferred maintenance. Apparently, the skylights over the European Painting Gallery were supposed to have been replaced during President Lydon Johnson’s administration. As you might imagine, deferring repairs was undermining the infrastructure of the building and not just threatening the collection with leaks. It ultimately cost $150 million to replace the six acres of skylights and associated HVAC, roofing, etc. He says there was not much philanthropic support for the project so I infer that the admission revenue is helping to pay down that cost.
There is another way. The Gewandhaus Leipzig in Germany (concert venue) offers flex- tickets for a small premium. Not an…