National Alliance for Media, Arts, and Culture; WGBH Forum Network; Commonwealth: Collaboration and Connectedness

I guess we're ready to introduce our brilliant panel here today. This again is the keynote session of the conference where we're discussing common wealth. That's the theme of this whole year's conference. It's about collaboration and about community. And we've got a brilliant list of speakers lined up to talk to us about it. First let me introduce David Bouclier. David is an author and activist. He's a leading scholar on the comments. He's the producer of a Web site called on the commons dot org. He'll take that far seat over there. He's also the co-founder of public knowledge. The Washington based advocacy group and he is the author of a new book called viral spiral about the rise of the digital comments which I will plug right here. And I think he also has some of these cards that you can take with him. Great book. Highly recommended. Another speaker is Tamara Goulds who is a former name and board member give it up for non-Mac board members. To. Get. An. Independent producer and an executive producer. She's the former E-D of bay that she also launched the international arm of ITV s the international television service. Tomorrow gold.

Also we have Christina Newman Scots is the visual arts director at real Otways in Hartford. She's got an upcoming exhibition that she's planning right now on contemporary West Indian art. And as you can see she's eight months pregnant with a beautiful baby girl that will be adding to our community. And that may require her to take a bathroom break during the session. So thank you for that. And the moderator for this discussion today is Valerie Linson. She's the series producer for basic black a television show on WGBH PBS station here in Boston. That's a public affairs and multimedia program that explores the black experience so I'll leave you with this fine panel to explore our theme today common law. Well first of all I'd like to thank me Mac for inviting me to moderate this panel and to meet these distinguished panelists. I remember around the time that be invited to come and moderate this panel. I read an article about them

leaving NBC to create this new company connecting distributors advertisers and producers. And I thought these commercial guys get together at the drop of a hat. So I know that nonprofits creatives and all the folks in this community are fully capable and can do the same thing. So in terms of laying out the foundation for our discussion I was just wondering if each of you could tell me. What does Commonwealth mean to you as it relates to interconnected creative communities. DAVID Well when I think of Common Wealth I immediately think of a structure that I've been studying for a lot over the past years of the Commons as a vehicle for creating common wealth and preserving it and maintaining it. And essentially the commons is created whenever a given community gets together and decides they want to manage a resource collectively for the long term with equitable access and sustainability over the long term and it's that's sort of a paradigm for

creating valuable stuff that's different from the market. And I think it's most evident most visible on the Internet where we've seen such a explosion of of not only viable but flourishing Commons is from Wikipedia to open access journals to social networking to the blogosphere. It just goes on and on and I think in fact we're seeing a common sector that's emerging that is distinct from and operating on different dynamics from the market place. But having a dynamic and productive relationship with the market as well. So it's not as if it's sequestered from the market. So I guess my short answer is I see the Commons as a new vehicle for communities to preserve their wealth over time and it's something that I think people in creative sectors especially need to pay attention to as a way for husbanding martialing protecting their

resources. You know I definitely want to come back to that notional value and well because you have some really interesting things to say about what that means outside the financial sector but Tamarac. I think David spoke about the common part. I think also to think about this the wealth piece which is that together we can leverage so much of what is happening in the public sphere to become so much more than the sum of our parts. At the at the PBS conference a few months ago Ken Burns was there and ubiquitous Ken Burns and PBS speaking about his new program about national parks and I was really struck by one of the things that the producer spoke about which was that the most beautiful land in the United States was really protected for all the people. And I think that in many ways the common wealth of media is that the most amazing creative output right now is happening by independent makers

and by everyday makers and we're sort of in that same moment where if we can really you know work on the legal side work on the on the public side to preserve what is being created in the public space in the realm of media. I think that the 21st century promises to look dramatically different than the media consolidation that we saw in the 20th century. As it relates to you know coming from a space like reeler which is a multi-disciplinary Contemporary Art Center which exists in a community in the commune park it hard for it. I think that the Commonwealth for us especially coming out of these for public art projects that we just it is very much based on. Kind of. Linking engine tuning and what members of the community are already doing and kind of serving as a partner and facilitator for what's already happening instead of you know because we're the visual arts it's very. Unlike media. I think we could do a

better job. What do you mean. Well you know I think that naturally for us we were the visual arts I mean and you know I'm working with artists a lot on. Specific projects that engage that engage people in very specific ways like media does. But I do think that in terms of that crossover in terms of radio television people doing the performing arts and I think that we could learn to tune into that community in a better way even though we part ways we do that very organically in some ways I think media. I think television and radio have an understanding. That we necessarily don't especially in terms of marketing. Advertising really thinking about some of these some of the bigger companies that can help. Smaller contemporary centers or non-profit centers get the word out. So. I mean right now the Commonwealth to me is being a support for our artistic

community and the community that we live in and kind of helping to facilitate that. And so what that leads me to you know the part about the the community I mean name act is you know of course a great example of how that connected and connected connectedness happens on a national level. I was wondering you know how do we begin to do that within our local communities where we live and work. Christine. How do you begin to do that. It's like how do you create those networks how do you. I think you know because I think coming from Jamaica. When we were working I used to do television and radio in Jamaica while curating exhibitions and also working as an artist and because it was not as much there not a lot of power structure so to speak. So things like that happened really naturally. And people are there so many people involved and how they they're the kind of fingers in the pot without having to go to get through this kind of form all of this there's no formal protocol

for these things to happen so no one's thinking of it in this way like. Well how can we. How can we make this happen. It's just happening. It's like it's organic is I mean so for instance if we're doing an art project. A friend has somebody who's doing it who's a deejay who has a friend who's doing radio who has a friend who works for the ad company who just did the design and then red stripe heard about it and they want to get involved to support it and sponsor it. And then there's you know the people that run the parts want to host the concert. And so it kind of has a slight trickle down effect where I find the difference in America is everything is so much more formal and so it's kind of this. Let's start with the round table and figure it out at the roundtable. And I just want to go to the source and you don't like roundtables because I just feel like the energy and the synergy and everything that's happening is right with the people that are producing the quality work and doing the projects and they have so many

ideas that don't get hurt that don't get hurt. And so you end up speaking to the same people that discussing the same things all the time and you miss like a whole group of people that have you know. Some. Them. Some really important things to share with you. So I think listening to the people in your listening to the people that you're working with and paying attention to that community first before you try to kind of remove it from there. Well I mean I I I understand the roundtable would not want it but the roundtable can be very important in terms of creating those formal structures. Now I was going to ask David and Tamra you know those. How do you how do you change the dynamic of that roundtable. One reason I'm fascinated by online commenters is because they open the door to many more people albeit not in person way so there's different dynamics but it's a barrier to entry is different and people can

self-select for issues that they're passionate about. For them to have the talent for it. And so instead of somebody from the center or the top coming down to identify you as passion people self-select that in fact is the paradigm for a lot of successful online Comins is such as open source software where people gravitate to the things where they see they can make a contribution and want to make a contribution. And so in a way a more efficient way of matching town with needs. And furthermore there's such a the online platforms provide an architecture for creating the community in a different way. Interactor be it a wiki wiki where people can contribute intuitively and still this experimental frontier. But the point is you can construct and move communities in different ways through online structures that them complement what's going on around in person roundtables. And I would just add to that in my in my experience you know our world has just

changed so dramatically even in the last 10 years has gone. It's it is simultaneously both much more in a hyper global but also hyper local. And those things are not exclusive at all in fact they really work together and just to kind of describe it a little bit more. You know five years ago at CBS we really saw the need for Americans to be getting you know much more international content than we were getting and looking at kind of the beginning of what were the international bureaus closing and the lack of foreign news coming through. And and after 9/11 the fact that we were actually getting less context about the rest of the world rather than more. And so we started looking at how we might sort of globalize our what had been previously for 15 years an entirely domestic operation of supporting independent filmmakers to bring their work to public television. So we thought well what does that look like in this global and this global world. And it's amazing in five years what has changed even with our thinking five years ago today because

because we had been so oriented towards broadcast in the US because of our mandate and mission we sort of developed an international program that was also centered on broadcast. So it looked different very different from what we were doing domestically but it's still sort of privileged a broadcast in the US. And so the concept was we would work with filmmakers from around the world to help develop programming for us television. And that's what we've done we've actually now funded 100 projects from over 80 countries. We're working in about 120 languages and we've distributed films to about 60 million American audiences on 35 different platforms in the U.S.. And what what I've seen is that that's that's been huge. Those platforms are broadcast. But in the last three years they've also become digital and they've become mobile that the broadcast is huge but we've really moved into a beyond broadcast phase of the programming as well because that is where audiences are really expecting to engage with the content. It's not people don't no longer just want to see it. They want to

respond to it. They want to make their own content in response they want to use it. They want to play games. They want to be you know really involved with that content in a different way and that that is actually enabling us to serve our mission which was really about engaging Americans with ideas and that the fact that the potential has changed so much in the last five years makes me think for all of you in the room with you as producers or as media art centers that we're all rethinking how we serve our missions using you know again the hyper global but also the hyper local And just to speak about the local pace for a minute because I think it has never been more important you know although people want to connect online and they want to connect you know using technology they want to connect with people around the world through games all these things they also want to connect in person. You know we've been running a community cinema campaign where we work and now we're in I think 80 80 cities around the U.S. where we screen films and have discussions and panels. All I can say is that there are not we cannot host enough of those events that people and I'm sure you and I know we do that with some of your centers around the country. People want to come together in person at the same

time as all of this is happening in the virtual space. And so kind of I think we all need to really look at our operation and look at are we offering a diversified range of services to our constituents that kind of meet all the different ways that people want to connect. And if anything technology has made our lives much more complicated I think in terms of you know people now expect everything all the time in every way you know sort of 24/7. And obviously the rights environment has not caught up with the viewer the viewer preferences. I think the public system and I don't want to jump I know Valerie have other questions we'll get to but I think that the public system has not yet found a way to ensure that our public makers are really you know able to meet the audience demands and once you get into rights in a way we are we're also looking at a way where we're trying to insure I know many of you are concerned with making sure that our filmmakers are actually able to to have revenue from the films that they're involved with them. Right. That independent rights holders are paid for the work that they do. At the same time we're balancing that with the desire to have their work seen.

Any time any place on any form of media. And so I think these are the conversations that we need to have which is how does this global digital public media resonate with a traditional rights and distribution structure that has not yet caught up to the potential of what is out there. I just wanted to mention briefly that towards the end of our discussion there are microphones in the middle of the auditorium and we'll have time for a Q&A afterward. But I wanted to follow up on this notion of. Public media trying to catch up with the you know it almost seems as though the mission and public media almost. Not so much at loggerheads but they're almost missing each other in conversation and I was wondering David is this a place where what you've learned around the creation of the Commons might help that conversation that building together. Well I think we're in a messy interregnum where the 20th century media broadcasts top down centralized out are being

challenged profoundly by this other model. And so I don't think there's any easy answers we're going to have to grow some new institutions. I know that there is a profound growth of open business models which are trying to build new profit structures upon communities where there less reliance upon intellectual property greater leveraging of people's social proclivities as everybody wants to interact that way and building ways to develop revenue streams from those communities. I think that that's that's the direction it's going to have to go. Or the top down institutions are going to have to adapt in some serious way. I mean a friend of mine pointed out to me that the only thing worse than being sampled on the Internet is not being the same. So some way we have to learn how to use the my theory of the commons is that people coming together as a social community are creating a socially created value and that is extremely important to market. My mike

is still there. The question is how can you develop some innovative business models to respect the community but still monetize something from those people coming together. And I think that's really the challenge that we're facing and I don't pretend to know your world is as well as you do. But I think there are some interesting experiments going on interacting with communities and still getting revenue for the way academics do having institutional revenue sources but then interacting as a commons yourself and not having everything be a market transaction. Can you talk about some of those experiments. I'm sorry. Can you talk about some of those Yeah. For example in the there's a music label called Magnatune which is a label that has its roster of scores of artists and they give a 50 50 split to the artist. No accounting trickery or shenanigans. And customers can buy albums for $5 to $18. They

choose the price knowing that they can be directly rewarding their artist and this is a deliberate strategy to cultivate a sense of appreciation honesty respect for the community which in turn they are banking on is going to have the loyalty for the company. So in other words the company is building a relationship with the community. Another I'll get say a non-media example but it might be applicable here is there's a lot of extreme sports like extreme skateboarding and skiing and so forth where the communities and its practitioners are on the cutting edge of developing innovative new types of equipment. But a lot of companies are developing these symbiotic relationships with these communities especially online to do they have the community to their R&D for them to have the community do their word of mouth advertising for them. And so in a way a business can use the community to offload cost structures they previously had to bear and let the community do it. But at the same time they have to expect the community and not be

predatory or try to over monetize it. So there's a difference between say Facebook which is a company that you know is the Facebook going to try to data mine your privacy. And is that being respectful of the community. Well the community was pushing back on Facebook for that. So there's an interesting tension between the business motives and the community's self-interest. And I think that is the nexus that needs to be explored and innovated with. You are also talking and anyone please jump in on this. You were talking about the building of new institutions in order to make this happen and part of you know institution building in this country is around politics. I was just wondering if there are any policies or you know who should we be you know making demands from our public officials and what should those kinds of demands or programs where should that be. What net neutrality is sort of the first word out there because without net neutrality as a policy to allow our players to function on the internet without

discrimination by the telephone companies the cable companies in terms of how their data streams are routed whether the big players have a fast track higher quality service and the rest of us have degraded service. That's a non-negotiable issue that we need to get codified in law or at least the FCC firm. So that's I just want to put that right out there and just to just to add to David's comment I think it's not only the creation of new institutions but the transformation of some of our older institutions that's also really at play here. You know one of the it's it's a it's a it's a small example but it actually has huge impact is looking at you know for film makers looking at the traditional forms of distribution for independent film you know many of you I'm sure have worked with some of the educational distributors and distributors who have really been part of the independent media ecosystem for the last 30 years. And what's been interesting with digital rights is that it's sort of come in and I think really you kind of had sort of an earthquake

how the whole world of distribution was happening for independence because what happened is you know if you say great I'm going to put your film online it's going to be distributed through iTunes and people are you know two billion people on the Internet can find your film now and buy it for you know a dollar 99 or 599 or 999 and their pricing keeps changing. Well of course the traditional distributors you know and they're right to think this you know what will happen to my model where I'm selling licenses to schools for $299. What will happen to my model where I'm delivering this through DVD and for film makers you know like myself. So I really am sympathetic to the position where you know people were selling DVDs for 1999. Well what's going to happen to this to this business model and I think the stakes are high because of course you know many of us finance our next project based on some of the revenue that we're able to to earn from our existing project and nobody wants to sacrifice you know real dollars for digital pennies and some of those some of the fears are out there. But at the same time the risk of not doing it is you know I think David's point the only thing worse than doing it is not doing it. And

many of our many of the film makers. The goal is to be seen by as many people. The money is there as a huge part of it. That audience is huge. And so coming up with you know this is not a zero sum game coming up with smart strategy smart windowing strategies smart ways of you know using the Internet for what you know for promotion or using it for limited periods to reach new audiences. I think we're also looking at what is actually going to shake out with with consumer habits. I think consumers are waiting to see what's going to happen with their own habits because all of these options are relatively you know just just born. You know we've created to kind of do to sort of beta test some of this because we got tired of the answer always being we don't now we don't know. You know when filmmakers would say well should I do this you know will I lose money if I put my film up on iTunes. Will I no longer be able to sell DVDs. And you know at ITV It was like Well maybe but maybe not. And you know and we decided that we wanted to get better answers. And so we we created something called the independent digital distribution line and we were able to get PBS to agree to be a

partner with us in the lab. And the idea is really it is a it is a lab to test what happens we're bringing and you know we're working with traditional distributors and trying to get them on board with really experimenting and getting metrics and getting data and reporting that back to the field and letting people know here. You know obviously it's not prescriptive but it's much more like this is what's happened to our you know now we have about 100 filmmakers participating in the lab meaning that they have given PBS they are new media rights and with that PBS is distributing their films to places like iTunes and Hulu and snag films under a PBS banner. These are all films that have aired on PBS. But the idea is that we're measuring what happens. You know obviously with us and with audience but also with their traditional distribution. So let's find out let's have some answers. And so that we can actually have this conversation from a place of some knowledge. And so I think that's you know slightly more drilling down than what they was talking about. But hopefully that kind of impact will help us. Help us talk about what it is that we want in this bigger public media 2.0 landscape.

What I have seen is jumping in I was just thinking about this because as relates to the museum or gallery space where are our our members our community is less. I think they're less not they're less in tune with the fact that we and we don't they don't explore our content the way that they're exploring your content. So for instance the normal situation would be if you go to an exhibition there's a major catalog produced in conjunction with this exhibition and you can purchase the catalog at the museum or the gallery and just till recently I mean museum spaces and contemporary centers seem to be reluctant to go to Whole Face book you know Twitter YouTube because they don't feel their constituents are going to be exploring. They're seeing the shows that way they need to have some kind of physical intimate relationship with it. And I've found with this exhibition that we're doing on contemporary West Indian art which you know works going to be coming in from all of the Anglophone Caribbean England Canada etc.. We have

decided to not make this like Precious physico get the catalog and do an enhanced alog with a group in Trinidad called draconian switch. And they've been really successful doing this. EMAC that they do it just got featured on Stephen Hellers blog and they got like 50000 hits in two minutes or something ridiculous. There were but we're trying to re-educate our our community. You know like it's not just that you can go to YouTube and see all these great clips or go to Hulu where you know you can actually go and. And take a virtual tour of an exhibition. So for especially for the purposes of the show coming up I've been thinking about. You know and working with Jamaica and Trinidad and Bahamas. There's not a lot of. Resources there for them to be traveling to the show. So we're showing a lot of artists that aren't able to make it. We don't have the funding to carry them so it's really key for them to be able to share this information with the people that they're working with. And you know so. I remember we did an e catalogue for an exhibition two years ago.

And I think that even though we were promoted it and it got so little. There was so little traffic. I think probably like Channel 3 News. Repeat from like 2000 to got more traffic. And it was such a beautiful i was you know we were also proud of it and artists were proud of it and they were spreading the word. But it's almost like there is a disconnect. With people that are using the science and to experience other. You know interesting media whether it's you know radio or they're podcasting and through this but it becomes the visual arts they're not. It's like there's a they shut down. So for us I think we have a longer road ahead of us. Than you guys do because you know I think that they're already understanding at least there aren't you know they're on the ball at them and they're kind of they're in the same world. And then also we have to think about our senior. Audiences and how they're participating as you were saying it's important for us to make sure that. Our we have diverse you know diverse programming

that fulfilling the needs of the different people that come to our spaces and so. We have a really wonderful senior audience that comes to our matinee films. You know we get up to 100. Active adults at one o'clock in the day for a film and a discussion. And I they are not going to Facebook. Me. Well no that's not true. There are a couple of them that might be on Facebook. But. But the common denominator is that this is more socially driven as opposed to market. And whether it's through in-person networks or through online networks the idea is that these social communities I think are the basis for developing the markets. And there are the open platforms in which people may or may not be socially integrated they're just checking in checking out. But there are these more coherent communities that if you come through media product can be meaningful to them and organically related to them. That's where I think the payoff is going to be for developing audiences.

We wanted to follow up on that notion of audiences because none of this work exists in the bathroom and you know it goes out into the world and it's consumed and you know. By audiences and I'm just wondering what part does the audience play in some in some ways they become creators themselves. That's where you know user generated content comes from. But you know in making you know Tamra to your point about the lab you know making these materials available to the audience what are we. Or would it be. What are you expecting to hear to learn to talk to the audience. What do you what the audience to do. Well I think you know in my in my world and especially in the world of ITV s international audience that audience is paramount to what we're doing. It's like you know it's a slightly different and domestically. When ITV is working hard you know we're sort of part of our work is supporting independent filmmakers and part of our work is making sure that the work that they're that they're making can get onto public television. So it's kind of a dual it's a dual mission. On ITV as

International our real goal is bringing international perspectives to American audiences. And so being able to support 100 international makers is a great kind of byproduct of what we're doing but the mission is really about reaching audiences. And so it's it's a it's a slight difference and I often have to remember that when you know when our committee is looking at some really you know esoteric interesting project that we'll never get seen on American television. And so part of that is working with the films that we that we get we want to push audiences and we want to push broadcasters and distributors in the U.S. more importantly to show things that are no different than what they would be showing if we didn't exist. We see ourselves as really kind of a place that can help tip broadcasters and distributors. Just to stretch a little bit and take and take some more risks. But we also work with the filmmakers to help them kind of shape their film somewhat by giving them input about you know American audiences. I mean one of the first projects that we've funded for years five years ago was a film called circus school by by two young Chinese filmmakers who were filming in Shanghai. They had had sort of this incredible

access to an acrobat school that was really really intense but the film that they came up with it was this amazing footage but it literally tracked. There were no characters. It followed you know four events. Basically it was like one armed headstand you know kind of it was all sort of by the event that the kids were competing in. It was like well you know American audiences are used to at least having some characters that we get to know where we have to be able to follow sort of a narrative arc about the story and it was like a different. It was a really different orientation because because the filmmakers who are making circus school were much more oriented towards kind of the competitions themselves and the team and so it was just sort of working with them on being able to kind of keep keep what they were doing but also adapted for what people in America are you know were kind of able to kind of understand. And so it went through a number of cuts and the filmmakers were really really involved with it and actually involved one of our producers going to China and working with them and so I think keeping the audience in mind isn't as huge on the international side to me.

You know without that you know the work it's just not you know it's just it's just not quite it's not going to be marked as a success for us. I think the challenge has been that it's much more than watching now. You said just get the audience to watch it now it's like the bar is so much higher because it's get the audience to engage to get the audience to get feedback get the audience to create their own work and response get the it's kind of you know if your job was hard before to get them to actually watch now it's you know kind of a whole new set of things and what the kinds of films that you know we're looking at that kind of inspire that kind of response and action and education. Required and use any sort of partners. I mean I think you know what we're finding is that our domestic model which involves a lot of on the ground outreach and audience engagement we're doing the same thing on international because it's like a broadcast around. It's not. It's not going to cut it. Right. I'm just switching gears a little bit now going back to something that you mentioned earlier Christine it be great if you could weigh in from a visual arts perspective this notion

of wealth and value and having it go beyond the financial you know especially as you saw it develop or the notion of wealth and value and how that developed through the creation of the commons. Well I think for me one of the things I most learned about the commons is that there's different forms of wealth that are not recognised by mainstream economics and that just because it doesn't have property individual property rights around it or have a price tag associated with it doesn't mean that it's not functionally valuable. For me the Commons starts to point to let's have a conversation about these socially created value that is often patronized or considered too intangible to take too seriously or too long term. But I'm reminded of many who may be familiar with Louis Hyde the author of the gift of the subtitle was the original subtitle was recently released after the 25th 25th anniversary edition but the original subtitle was imagination and the

erotic life of property. And it was about getting out of it and how property was House community and the commerce of the human spirit was created through gift exchange and how this created immense value that the market can understand his. His book was a meditation and creativity in American culture and how the creative spirit can be nurtured in a world in which everything is monetized. The Internet is making this more legible and I think we need to pay attention to the gift economy. I took the liberty of reading getting a quote of his which may bear on this. He says scarcity and abundance have as much to do with the forms of exchange with the form of exchange as with how much material wealth is at hand. Scarcity appears on wealth cannot flow. The problem is that wealth ceases to move freely when all things are counted in price it may accumulate in great heaps but fewer and fewer people can afford to enjoy it. And the assumptions

that exchange trade property is plagued by entropy and wealth can become scarce even though it increases gifts that remain. Gifts can support an affluence of satisfaction even without numerical abundance. So it's an interesting meditation on how the creative spark can be more vital in a gift economy than in something that's over marketed. You can think of top 40 radio and how moribund it is versus what a small neighborhood or a community might do creatively. So that would go towards building this notion of common wealth common wealth indeed. Christine I think that what's special about me is and special for me working there is the fact that we're what we do isn't like commercial galleries we're not commercially driven and it's. You know so I find that when when we work with artists whose exhibitions they can truly focus on their work and their process. And use the space. As I said

earlier is it like a platform to show what they're doing. And. That's a wonderful place to be because you know we don't have to worry about. And of course there we have worried about the economy right. How are you know surviving. But in terms of how we function with our artists and our performing artist and. You know all the different programming that we do there it's really about. Exposing people and educating people to contemporary cutting edge contemporary art. And so it's been such I've. Been working with artists I've seen how they get their response every time they come in the space they have these questions that they would normally have for traditional museum spaces or for commercial gallery spaces where they're like so tell me what you want me to do more. What do you what's the price. What do you think the price is this should be or will this be. You know they have all of these and then when they come in through our doors we're like no no no.

What would you like to do. How would you like to see the work space. Let's talk about that and then I find it through that experience. I mean it's just the words spreads far and wide because we've lost this kind of being so caught up with the market especially in the last couple of years with the art market and with all of these art fairs that are happening and everything you know artists are graduating to Yale and they're their first exhibitions they're trying to sell it for fifty five thousand dollars and they think that that's OK. No one's really educating them. No one's there's no one kind of setting the bar or. There's really no information because I don't have a clue as to how people are pricing things these days in terms of. How visual art is or kind of. Getting their work seen. So I think that. I think that's a problem. Because I do think it kind of confuses and models things. And but I do enjoy the fact that we don't have to necessarily mean we are not part of that. Problem that we can help to kind of have dialogue about solve that. So.

You know for me it's just much more refreshing to focus on work. But in practical terms it's like you know there are costs that have to be born and I'm just wondering how do you how do you marry those costs that have to be born with you know the the commitment to the mission you know to to value value for its own sake or the value the art for its own sake. Well I mean we get a lot of support from. Well. You know we get a lot of support from our members and we have if we'll Kay Wilkins our executive director is there he can tell you how many members we have. I always mess it up. So like 2000. Well. He's. He's around there. You know. We you know without organizations such as you know the National Endowment for the arts and so traditional shrine that's very very traditional structures that. Help keep us afloat. But I think that. What makes this stand out

to is the fact that the types of programming that we're bringing the types of programming that we're doing is so very different to your kind of standard traditional art space that it continues to create a buzz and and you know. Keeps us competitive and the whole idea of the focus on art and the arts process. That just you know the artists are our best evangelists. They care about. And I mean you can't you can't pay for advertising that can do you know with artist and your members can do when you give them these kind of keyed experiences. Switching gears just a little bit more. One last question before we head to Q&A. I wondered if you could talk about the notion this term that has been used in the past few years the creative economy and how. That plays a part in this notion of building a common wall. I was just thank you for that question. I was just thinking about that in terms of your other point about there are real costs

that have to be born. This is. It is so true and I'm sure like like many many of you know are looking at kind of you know again kind of back to the closing of the international bureaus the closing of you know the sort of the end of newspapers that you know where are how are we. I'm supporting and valuing our storytellers and our journalists and our and the people who are out there and you know over over time really trying to tell the stories that are so important to our time. You know what I see with TV is that we are one of a handful of places that supports long form. Documentary films and filmmakers who are telling stories over years and that we need stories like that and we need we need journalists who are able to follow stories for the time it takes to really have the story told. Yeah. You know and I'm sure you felt this too but it's you know Yahoo. Does not have a bureau anywhere in the world they themselves are not a news generating source. They're a fabulous distributor of the news but who will be the you know where will be the places that actually are getting the storyteller's financed to be able to do it as

their job and not as kind of you know on the side that it's not a way of valuing our storytellers to ask them to do it on top of their other jobs. And you know I can't I can't say who it was but I will say I was the senior person at Google who says to me Oh yeah there's all this ballyhooing about the closing of the news bureaus. I'm so happy I'm so sick of all you know that masquerading as journalism and I was like well what do you know what he's saying. He was like Well I think that there is no time for the transformation of journalism where anybody in any you know in any part of the world can be can can tell their story. And I said sure but it's very different if you know anybody in the world is telling their story and putting that up and that's fabulous and all and well and good but that is very different than than what. Than what we're asking people to who are actually there as their job for months on end to really trying to get under and inside a story and I think it really raises some of the questions too that we have faced. I asked which is you know everyone now is a media maker. And and I think that is you know probably one of the most exciting things that ever could have

happened. But then how do you know where are kind of there is a spectrum and how do you deal with that and how do you kind of. I think you know what is the difference between a professional media maker and somebody who's making media in their you know in their college dorm room and kind of supporting all of those stages of media making you know I look at the bay back lab and I think the producers Institute and I think this is just one of the most wonderful things that I wish we had 100 of them to really help producers you know shape their shape their stories and figure out the best way of telling that story and getting it to the right platform because what we really need to be doing is incubating and developing kind of all stages of talent from you know across across the spectrum and. You know. That it's you know talk about our wealth. To me that is where we need to all be investing kind of in all the different phases that we're interacting it's media art centers. You know for our centers to funders to broadcasters you know that is just one of the most important places that we can be investing with. But I think that's a really important point but if the within how

media is transitioning and what's happening in technology if the. Community has the power. Right. And so you're talking about like the the the journalist the real the journalist versus the hobbyist. If the community is responding and only paying attention to the hobbyist who's How then does that who validates the read real journalists because you know with all of this what's happening the technology we're empowering our community or empowering our audiences and they hold the you know they hold the key. And so if they're not on the same page as the ones producing the content where does that leave us with. I think that's why we need to get a greater alignment between those communities and the media itself. One of the crises of journalism is that people don't trust commercial journalism anymore. They trust their bloggers and in fact while a lot of bloggers are in their pajamas many are rather serious journalists who have specialties and expertise that no beat reporter for The New York Times is going to have yet.

So I think what we're having is a struggle for who is more socially trustworthy and connected. I think arguably what the media needs to media both commercial media but also in the media needs to find the social validation and connection that journalism is struggling for right now in its own way. But just to respond to the whole cost issue I think that is the key issue. I don't think journalism is going to reinvent itself as a for profit lucrative institution. It's going to reinvent itself as a nonprofit more localized regionalized or social community oriented institution. And I I would submit that that's where a lot of money is going to go because that's going to be a more stable secure and ultimately more. Profitable way to generate revenue than trying to flog the beast through top down advertising.

Thank you all very much. I think that now we were going to move to the portion for a Q&A. So if anyone has any questions or microphones. In the middle of the room. Don't be shy. Thanks for your illuminating talk here. One of the. Things is. When you talk about rights. Creator creator rights creator rights and how. Difficult that model is. To educate. Content creators as well as. The public. I don't know if you're aware of it but is this past legislative year bill called The Orphan Works fill of 2000. Nearly passed without a single member of

Congress. Voting. We discovered it in the early. Spring of 2000. And it just formed that group that went to Washington. Through the Internet to collectively represent about half million people. But there were only 15 of us actually went to Washington and met directly with senators and the House of Representatives people educate them on this bill. They had never heard it. Where. If they had they knew nothing about it. And it's amazing what you can learn if you yourself go to Washington. And sit down and constituents. And your representative were Senators office. And tell them of your concerns. You mean a lot more to them. Than a paid lobbyist and they know. This was quite. A different view than I have in Washington and I've really learned a lot. But it was largely through a very committed

effort of Education that. This bill is finally it. In the House Judiciary Committee it passed the Senate. Narrowly passed the House. And. It will come up again. What you were found works though was. Was that. Anything that any content creator whether music film photography painting sculpture or whatever. Wasn't registered with the Copyright Office and with one of. Several. Databases. That could be searched by somebody who wanted to use your content. I'm sorry I don't mean to interrupt but is your question for David or for tomorrow or what is the question. Well we just we just welcome. Anybody's input and knowledge of the orphan works. Bill and also about educating copyright. For. This new age and also. Educating.

OK. And you should come. Thank you. Here's a question in the back there. Yes. I wanted to ask the question I was very interested in the whole concept of a company where. I'm I'm sorry we can't hear you can't hear from one CAN YOU COME TO THE FRONT. Sure. So. Is. This big for the speaker. Thank you. Can you hear me now. OK. Wonderful. I was very intrigued with the topic of the Commonwealth and that's one of the reasons why sure I attended the session. And I guess one of the things that concerned me is that in all of your discussions about the Commonwealth preserving it. And. Enabling it in the future there was very little discussion about the audiences that are coming in terms you talked about engaging audiences capturing them and you're getting responses from them. And I work with children. I'm a children's author. And so the K through third

grade group is going to be the audience in the next 10 to 20 years. And I haven't heard any concept of engaging them really in terms of exposure that if you look at. Those watching the PBS documentary about how the blues is becoming very esoteric very sort of exclusive with people who appreciate the blues and a lot of it is exposure. So if you look at children's television Where's the art. Where's the high quality music was the high quality video where your audience is going to become or are we are they going to come from. And you keep talking about technology and the real innovators increase with this new technology our tweens. Their kids 12 years old. And if they've not been a coach related to our time. To appreciate the visual arts to appreciate dance to appreciate you know all of these elements that we as you artist are giving to the world we're going to be what I'm concerned about is I think hip hop is wonderful. But I think that there's a

lot of heart that's being created and part of her job is hard is to envision all of society and not just adults. You know we got to talk tweens we've got to talk kindergarten. You know we get it. We expose them to Bokassa in kindergarten. Why not. It's a lot of color a lot of shades. It works. And so the concept of our audience needs to go down a little bit so that we can grow into the future because we're talking to the adults we're all going to die. And the people be coming coming behind us and not going to have the sensibility to appreciate the art that we've developed. Thank you. That's a really interesting point. You know I was as you were speaking I was thinking how do we prepare these coming audiences to participate in this. This atmosphere this commonwealth. To to this woman's point. I have just had two quick points one I couldn't agree with you more. I have a five year old and a 3 year old and my 5 year old will ask me if we're planning to Skype or

Blackberry her grandparents so I can see it the digital natives are way ahead of where we were at at this time and that the potential is huge for for what we need to be doing with them and what their capacity for understanding digital media is tremendous. I also think something we didn't talk about his legacy content and part of the Commonwealth is also the incredible body of the archive of public media. And I think it would be remiss not to talk about that as part of the Commonwealth in terms of you know what does it mean to go back and make sure that the work that has been created as part of public media since you know really going back to the 60s and before in cases as far back as we can to make sure that that work is protected and you know licensed when necessary are part of the orphan works or is available to the public. I mean what weve been doing you know on a very limited scale is going back and trying to clear rights for for previously funded TV programs and make them available. You know online and in partnership with PBS. And that alone has just turned into its kind of one of those

projects that just get stickier and secure and secure because the more you get sucked into the complications of each each film. But you realized this is a pressing issue. So its both about protecting our the past and the legacy so that we can bring that to the younger audience as the next generation because I think you know I mean it's. You know. I mean just I mean there are so many so many examples I want my children to be able to watch eyes on the prize. I want my children to be able to watch you know amazing documentaries that have been made and not to have them just go away because nobody is able to protect those rights. It really aren't we. We have this really fantastic program called film school trips which we've bused in over 10000 children all across Hartford in the past couple of years to see a film and there was a facilitator that talks about it so we'll show 90 times. Or we'll show a rising. We have about six films on our attention. And. Most of them address some of the. Kind of. Issues that are happening in schools around

race. And. Kind of how they're feeling. You know right now is as kids the kids are usually between the ages of I would say 11 to 15 and it's been really successful because you know as a contemporary art space to contemporary art on a whole is intimidating. And so we don't have a formal educational program in terms of doing art education workshops we do workshops with our community we do these things but we don't have an on staff. Kind of. Education core education person. But what I've what we found is that these children. That come through the space and see these films and. Talk to the facilitator they have this you know immediate connection and they bring their families back. And they spend some time in the galleries and they'll ask questions and they become much more engaged. And some of them didn't even know that we existed. And you know we also have this fantastic program called Neighborhood studios which is something that we partner with the Greater Hartford Arts Council which we have kids from 14 to 18.

There are 10 that are selected they get interviewed and then they're taught by a master teaching artist who teaches them about filmmaking and editing and at the end they do these little mini documentaries or screen and they're super proud because you know we have this very wonderful cinema with 153 seats or so when they get to screen it to their families and you know I think that. Film has been instrumental in engaging kids because they're so you know this is they're going home and they're Googling and it's all kind of happening very fast and. The kind of slow pacing you know are sauntering through a museum is like they're about to doze off into there as you know they're interested but I think that the way that it's been successful for us is to have these types of programs and then just within our community we have this free program every year called Parker. Which is a very informal drop in program for children that live in the park neighborhood and at seven weeks and we have a young teacher that comes in. And they do projects and then we host an exhibition for them and they can invite their parents who

rarely come to this space because they're busy and you know things are going on but I think you're very right about you know. The you know the youth audience and not overlooking them. Right. They're extremely important. I think it's the the technology has its limits. But the presumption of participant participation and access is probably the best means for getting young people more involved. I know my own sons have discovered all these artists from the 50s and 60s by going to YouTube videos of them that were resurrected. Now that's you know in a strange way a way that the past has been brought to life for a new generation. I don't want to overstate this because that kind of participation is very different from truly being part of a community. But it is a point of access. There's a question in the back. Your comment last night there was a really interesting discussion that was happening in the bar. That's where they all have. Some of the issues come.

In open space around issues of digital literacy that many of us don't tend to often grapple with when we're thinking about wonders and celebrating mobile technology which is really kind of ripping that veil away from somebody. With around some of the ethical issues involved in using these technologies in terms of how they can affect people's daily lives in terms of representation in political situations as well as cultural situations and how there is actually a real dark side that we don't always seek knowledge. And part of the Commonwealth that this community is that we hold the key to looking at the ethics of the technologies that are out there and not accepting them really only at face value for what they are and trying to really understand the kind of change that a lot of these technologies to snare us. And I think.

All. Those things. So I mean I think we go Oh boy so much about everything we do but we don't really always understand the implications. Of what it means to be in an. Environment and that practice has practice. That's when I. Think. I would say. I think that's so true. And one of the things that I think we're starting to see is kind of a backlash a little bit against this idea that the web automatically connects you to all these different perspectives and they're finding some new data is finding that. Peepholes use the use and practice of the web is actually serving to reinforce people's existing beliefs and ideas because people are because of the niche aspect. People are kind of curating for themselves by finding like minded people that are

reinforcing their same ideas and in some cases stereotypes and the same you know. So it's not necessarily you know that it's opening everybody's mind by connecting them to the world. In fact it's allowing them to connect to people who are just like them which is not necessarily what the goal or what the potential of the technology is. Yes. I just wanted to follow up on Howland's intervention. And Adam. And he had a comment. David you started with saying. If. You're. The only thing worse than not. Getting sampled is not going. To bring us back. The last Hollywood studio system Carol Lemley in 1931 said there ain't no such thing as bad publicity and movies live from mouth to mouth. So I think when we look at new technologies. We cannot just amputate them from their histories with in a

global capitalist media system that was in place since 1985 and these economically these economic vultures of transnational media corporations have not reinvented themselves. They've always always been multi-platform themselves to do what Carl Lemley suggested which is to say movies live in the mouths of people who see that meaning. Word of mouth. So might my point also is that if we're looking at new technologies and new forms and we're globalizing What exactly are the forms that we are putting out there. There have been issues raised in the international human rights movement for example by witness and others by NGOs in India that YouTube creates vaudeville shows out of human suffering. And we saw this a lot in the world coming out of Iran or similarly and I don't

mean this as a kind of snotty criticism tomorrow. But when I hear you discuss filmmakers in Shanghai working in a circus and you work I TVSM strategy to get them to use characters and narrative. I respond. And I think there are many many narrative forms around the globe a proliferation multiplication of different forms of telling stories. When I hear character narrative narrative Ardsley I hear a racialized white first world popular culture notion. Of how to tell a story. That disturbs me because my question would be to take all of what you've all said and cannot turn it inside out. Like when you wash your good genes in and ask if you turn it inside out. What are ways to think about new forms new concepts

new interventions new epistemologies that can be outside of very placid ways of accepting things. I'm very disturbed by the Shanghai story. And I just have to say I have lived in Asia and I would dare to just put out there that I think that if we are truly looking at a Kamens we must really think about new forms that are sometimes beyond antagonist protagonist stories. We have to think of ways of using technologies that are not just about vibrantly spreading ideas that can become R&D units for corporations you know. So my question really I don't mean this to be like the you know intervention that. You know throws the wet rag on things but you really just say as in our euphoria of the new 21st century to pick up on

how and I think that there are enormous contradictions raising enormous ethical and political issues that are like tectonic plates moving cracking open things and we need new ways to think about it. So I think we're all much smarter than me in this. And I'll be anxious to hear what you all have to say. Thank you. Thank you. Tomorrow you. So I mean I just you know I really really understand what you're saying and I support what you're saying. I want to you know just sort of think through a little bit though about you know part of a part of what what I'm trying to do is think about. You know kind of the right you know what formats work best with what storytelling techniques. And I think that's what we're all doing which is you know trying to bring out the best stories and take advantage of all the new ways of telling stories that are out there. And with that with those filmmakers you know I think you know the issue was what how can we make this a one hour film that can be

on you know we couldn't find any broadcaster in the U.S. who would actually take the film and said it was a question of how do we get this to a place where we can actually keep it as close to how it was but also make it make it available and at the same time really preserve the film makers and how they wanted to tell a day they themselves were actually so happy for this process they were also new emerging filmmakers. Part of it was really a filmmaking experience and kind of being in their own kind of lab themselves in terms of how to get the film you know made and completed. But I think that there's lots of different ways for that story to have been told a one hour a one hour broadcast may not have been the right way for that initial version of how they were doing it to be and I think there's lots of ways kind of three different formats that in shorter shorter ways are sort of forms that could have been possible but I agree that you know there are now more opportunities to tell different kinds of stories. Not all of them are right for broadcast. And that's I think that's just part of how we have to think about it. David. I resonate to those comments.

I think that there's going to be a lot of new innovation in institutions that need to be created and the market is going to have to sort of the market is more problematic at least in its traditional ways than it's ever been because non-market modes of creation and distribution are more viable more efficient more socially convivial. That whether the market's going to have to be domesticated and find new ways to interact with communities so that it is less like the predatory media corporations of the 20th century. But the the commenter was absolutely accurate that we're living with these paradoxes. I mean for me the idea that Google might be doing a great service to humankind by putting all this Google Books Online at the same time it's monopolizing the public domain and orphan works. Get your mind around that. So I think we're dealing with a lot of these. Imponderables you know in a world of great turmoil. I take great encouragement for the fact

that the market has to reinvent itself does have capacities that the Commons or non-market sector doesn't have and that we can renegotiate the terms by which the market and the commons interact. While the commons itself can develop new muscles new instrumentalities for assert itself as a different sector for creation and distribution. So I share a lot of the sense of awe wonder and shock that's going on right now. As someone who has spent 30 40 years in the electronic media and. Created programs with the idea. That. Taro's don't reach as many people as possible. I have had second thoughts about reaching as many people as possible and the Internet actually. Frightens me because of that as well as the

the idea of public television or millions and that. Sort of concept. What I think we saw over the last. 15 20 years is the right wing's grassroots organizing really took place in space. And when I see that word Commons. I realise. That. The people with multicultural progressive ideas have very few public spaces and and and my fear. Is that we are putting a lot of emphasis. On. Distribution and technology. For larger audiences. And. The idea of the local. Which you which you so eloquently spoke for is something that seems to be missing in terms of how we organize our media. And I think there's got to be a way in which we need to create more space

and the model that I see that I think is very exciting something like real art waves is a very exciting model but also the gay and lesbian cinema. Which has taken place all over the country where you see immense diversity intergenerational as well as I mean you see kids you see older people we see diverse in racial profiles. In these centers. And I think. We need to think about creating more spaces and centers. In relationship to our immediate and then moving from the internet. Base or the television or this individual sort of watching and being part of it and trying to create spaces where that media then ends up in places where people are going to have interactions among themselves in a much more grassroots place. Of the right wing. Has done

wonderful. Doing services through churches. And and have spread throughout Latin America because they had space and they had money. And they had services. And we are just providing you know an Internet piece of property maybe or something that some can see on the Internet. But this idea of creating a space is not bringing people together and I'm concerned about space. And calm. Thank you. I just got the five minute mark and we have one last question. In the back. But I just wonder why not. You wanted to respond to this gentleman's. Comment. Before we go to that last question. No I think that's very valid. You know. I am. What am I. Which generation of my what is this X Y Z. I was I think am I what am I I'm 34 What is that X or Y. It's x. Thank you. But yeah I'm not I am not. I didn't grow up in this kind of Internet savvy world. You know I grew up in

in Jamaica and you know this idea of these spaces where if I was saying earlier that. Had I had I chose the time to go to college in America instead of going in to make my entire experience would have been different and just you know relating to my peers right now. And I I'm not good enough is bad or good it's just soooo uniquely. Different. That. This idea in the intimate not intimate with like a system like something that you can. Plug in. But with people I write conversation and talking about things and experiencing things together and. I think that's so key and I do I do have some fear about what's happening. As kind of technology is doing what it's doing and advancing at the rate it's advancing what happens in those spaces because I see my nieces and nephews who are 8 and 9. And they will literally spend six hours in their bedroom.

Playing. We or on YouTube or whatever thing they're there or not. You know they're not going to places outside of buying fast food or if their parents forced them. I mean just some of those things worry me because in the future I really don't know what the effect of that is going to be if we if we keep supporting that model without finding some kind of balance because the kids that's the model right. I mean if you can show me a kid right now unless their parents are forcing them to do otherwise they're they're all kind of tuned in the right zone tuned out. At the same time. So. Last question. OK. Two things. One is I'm a member. Real airplanes. I am an alum of USC. I was a documentary independent documentary filmmaker and I once competed with basic black for local TV. So I think I covered all of you. But my question is because of international contracts. And with my documentary right now I'm concerned about. The fact that I'm competing with

documentaries overseas right now that are funded by governments. And. Trying to get exclusivity in the U.S.. For. My dog and also get it out to a worldwide audience and they're trying to come back in the U.S.. And so my question was about with international productions I understand. We want to. Open out the audience and the distribution of all our films worldwide globally whatever and make it more even. But that's kind of what I'm concerned about right now is how do you do that. But at the same point. Secure window for your own production. Want to be sure I just heard I want to be sure I heard all of that question is the question just repeat the last part of your question I'm sorry the sound is not great up here. Sorry. Was it was about with how do you

get that global audience but secure your own production when you're when it's two things I'm worried about the documentaries over there which are funded and supported by governments already. They of course want to get into the U.S. market. And I understand the exchange of ideas side of it and having a different viewpoint definitely. I mean especially with the war it was great to have another viewpoint on that. But my concern was also about exclusivity and competing with fully funded organizations over there. When it's such a scramble to get funding here and trying to preserve my window here but also disseminate it to a wider audience as well. So you're concerned about creating a level playing field in some ways with that. Intellectually Yeah you want to create it into a level playing field to get the ideas shared around the world. But then also how do you

check up. On what I was concerned about is if there's a competing doco overseas that wants to get into the U.S. market. Do. They check this exclusivity both ways. OK. The exclusivity both both ways. Yes. Yeah. I'm so sorry. The audio is not great. I mean I think that this question of what happens I mean I think we've seen it with with with global trade or right it's kind of like what happens if the pipeline gets open and what's you know kind of what's good for what's good for artists. Around the world. I mean I think that you know sort of the business terms of exclusivity and financing are always complicated. You know our hope is that CO financing is actually a way to bring more dollars to American filmmakers as well that it's not just about American dollars going to to buy U.S. rights for international makers but also US makers able to secure more pre-production and production funding from International Co financers as well. But it does work both

ways. I'm happy to talk to you after more detail about that question. But I think you know the hope is that it's you know a bigger pie and not competing for you know scarce resources with more competitors. Well unfortunately. Thank you DO WE HAVE TIME FOR ONE MORE. Sure. Could you. Can you come here when you come down to the mike so we can see and hear you. Hi. I just want to make sure just to put in a word for savey what we have already that NAMEER really began to preserve the media and art centers around the country and public access really in many ways has become. Has served that function.

And public access around in many many communities is is is be threatened that makes news for the Navy to cut off support for it is because all there is you have to block yourself on the Internet. And just as I think that those centers are such an important space that there's a real media center provides. For it for access to the Internet. I mean there are many people who don't have. Access to the fast. Lines that are enjoyed by. A number of us here. But it's sad to think. Of the many institutions that have disappeared like a I have read somebody actually. Use that. As their. Intro. I say I am.

We in various advocacy organizations that pays attention to things to this independent community. And I hope that any man can step in and. Help and in places like free press. Can not jump on this bandwagon for. Twitter. Twitter. Gets. It. Thank you. So we have run out of time but I think our panelists very much for an incredible discussion and the audience as well for your participation and questions. And I think with that we're adjourned.