22nd General Conference of ICOM, 7-12 November 2010,
ICOM MPR „Communication and New Audiences”
New Museums in
Katarzyna
Jagodzińska, International Cultural Centre in
Decades of the second half of the 20th
century and the beginning of the 21st century are the time of the
worldwide fashion for museums. There are founded museums of art, cultures,
history, music, cars. Their exhibitions deal with places, events or brands. Regardless
country and cultural borders they look similar as they are created by the same
group of architects who follow the same world trends. Museum boom is not only
about cities and countries widely related to cultural mainstream and not only
about countries where the museums saturation level is the highest, but also
about the regions which rarely appear on cultural world map and whose cultural
investments and artistic achievements are regarded mainly locally. In the 90.
museum boom became visible in the countries of
After the end of the Second World
War,
Taking the different areas of
Central European countries into account, as well as differences in population
density, the individual states differ when it comes to the saturation of
museums. In 2005, 772 museums were operating in
|
|
Number of museums per 100.000 inhabitants |
Number of museums per 1000 km² |
||
|
Year |
2005 |
2007 |
2005 |
2007 |
|
|
7.62 |
6.27 |
8.29 |
6.80 |
|
|
4.10 |
4.40 |
5.30 |
5.69 |
|
|
1.80 |
1.88 |
2.20 |
2.30 |
|
|
1.71 |
1.91 |
1.88 |
2.10 |
Own
calculations by the author
This information indicates that the largest
and most populated country has statistically the poorest results in securing
the access to culture, heritage and art to its citizens. Surely because of the
low index in museum saturation in the beginning of the 21st century,
The most interesting aspect from the
point of view of this article would be to compare the number of art museums,
yet this is not possible on account of the fact that the statistical office in
Slovakia did not separate a category specifying the type of museum in its
examination (all museums are classified together), whereas the statistical
office in Hungary performed such classification within the range of museums
only until the year 2000.
Concerning museum and centres of
modern and contemporary art created after 1989 one can name five new
institutions in the Czech Republic[2] and two more which
emerged from the existing institutions[3], in Poland there
were founded four new institutions (one is a branch of the existing institution
which was thoroughly reformed and renovated)[4], five more will be
created and/or built until 2016[5], one until 2012 will
receive a new seat[6], and one more will
be extended and rebuilt[7], in Slovakia there
were two new institutions created[8], and in Hungary
– four new institutions.[9]
All museums and exhibition halls
in
|
|
Museum Kampa in FUTURA
Centre for Contemporary Art in DOX Centrum současného
umění in Prague (DOX) MeetFactory
in Wannieck Gallery in |
|
|
Centre of Contemporary Art Znaki Czasu in Muzeum Sztuki
– ms² in Łódź (ms²) Instytut Sztuki Wyspa in |
|
|
Mzeum
moderného umenia Danubiana in Cunovo near |
|
|
Kogart in MODEM Modern és Kortárs Művészeti
Központ in |
In the
first phase I made an analysis of museum websites in the context of character
and ammount of uploaded materials, as well as the use of tools serving
communication with audiences. In the second phase I sent a questionnaire to
persons dealing with communication in museums where they were asked to evaluate
the efficiency of communication tools and specify more precisely selected
information which is inaccessible on websites.
Museums in the web – an
analysis
Museum
websites in national languages have their counterparts in English (no other
languages are applied). In the case of 3 institutions English version is
limited (Modem, CSW, IS Wyspa), and 1 institution runs the English version
website only (. All institutions provide basic
contact information on their websites: address, telephone, email, but only 8 (out
of 13) make direct phone numbers or email to employees available. Written
directions or a location map is widely applied – only 2 institutions do
not publish them . Ticket price information is not that
common – 4 institutions do not provide this information IS Wyspa).
The basic
aim of a website is to inform users about the institution’s programme.
Information about current exhibitions is available on all websites, 12 institutions
inform about past exhibitions (except which does
not have a separate archive of exhibitions, only general archive of all events
is available where it is very difficult to find an exhibition), and 9
institutions give preview of upcoming exhibitions (except ).
Exhibition information can be regarded as exhausted (except Kampa), however, 4
institution did not find it necessary to publish a gallery of reproductions
that would accompany written descriptions (
do not provide more than one reproduction). It should be emphasised that also apply videos related to exhibitions on their websites.
2 out of
13 analysed institutions do not have collections. Among 11 which hold
collections of art, 7 include a history of a collection, its description and a
gallery of reproductions (more that two) on their websites (description is
missing on Wannieck, websites and
illustrative part is missing on websites)
– it is not included at all on Kogart and MSN websites (collection
appears only when it is presented as a temporary exhibition – available
in exhibition archive). Institution itself is also a subject of a narrative of
a website. All websites provide photographs of museum buildings, however, their
description appear on 8 websites only (except ) and the history of institution is
available from 12 websites (except).
Apart from
information, texts and illustrations a museum website is a place where the
institution initiates contact with its audience. The www offers subscription of
a newsletter, it is linked to accounts on social services, it enables feedback
from visitors using museum blog and forum. There are special press sections for
journalists, and press articles are available for visitors as scans or links to
periodicals in sections entitled “written about us”. Also an
Internet bookshop is available where one can order museum publications.
Unfortunately all these options are not so common among Central European
museums. Internet press section is run by only 4 institutions (DOX, Wannieck,
Ludwig, CSW), and only 3 boast about articles related to them in the press (Futura,
Wannieck, Kogart) – different institutions in both cases. Only 3
institutions offer the possibility of buying their publications online.
Newsletter in national language is prepared by 11 institutions (except
Danubiana, ), and in English only by 6 (ms², ). Number of subscribers
differ – institutions located in capitals have definitely more
subscribers than institutions in other regions.
|
MSN in |
12000 |
|
DOX in |
8200 |
|
Museum
Kampa in |
5000 |
|
ms² in Łódź |
5000 |
|
|
3800 |
|
FUTURA in |
3500 |
|
Kogart in
|
2700 |
|
MODEM in |
2000 |
|
CSW in |
1500 |
|
IS Wyspa
in |
1400 |
|
Wannieck Galery in |
1000 |
In the second phase of my research I asked representatives of communication departments of analysed institutions to fill in a short questionnaire. I received answers from 11 institutions – in spite of many attempts I did not manage to make contact with We are a small museum, where I´m the only one making all tasks and you will surely understand that we have no department, which could handle your questions and answer them expertly – Vincent Polakovič
No targets divided. Whoever reached by our emails and Facebook is a receiver, and All our materials are being sent out in two language versions: Czech for locals and English for the rest of the world – Ondrej Stupal wrote in email. PR specialist in DOX selected target groups with the reservation that: We do not focus on one age group only, our visitors are ranging from students to senior citizens. We are opened to everybody who is interested in new ideas we present. The numbers we added to your groups reflect the results of the research – who is our visitor (Terezie Kaslová, MediaReport s.r.o.). 9 institutions selected age group between 25-35 years and 1 institution the age group up to 24 years (IS Wyspa) – this means mainly young people in the age after higher education, professionally active, using Internet. All institutions marked that they communicate mainly with citizens of their own country (Poles, Slovaks, Czechs, Hungarians). 6 institutions marked a city where institution is located as the main territory of interest (Kampa, DOX, Modem, Kogart, MSN, ms²), and 4 other – the whole country (Wannieck, Ludwig, CSW, IS Wyspa). All institutions consider websites as highly significant methods of communication comparing to traditional printed promotional materials – in 10 points scale (0 points – it is completely unimportant; 10 points – it is the most important of all methods) a website received the average of 8,6 points (Ludwig and ms² awarded the least – 7 points, and Futura, DOX and MSN awarded maximum of 10 points). Other forms of internet communication comparing to information in traditional media (press, radio, tv) have smaller value than a website – 7,7 points in average (Kampa and DOX awarded 5 points, IS Wyspa – 10 points). In the open question about the most effective methods of communication representatives of institutions indicated Facebook at the first place (6), followed by newsletter (5), and a website (4).
I also asked for communication
methods that have not been used so far and which are to be implemented. IS
Wyspa plans to establish an internet radio, CSW aims to implement an online
system of booking and selling tickets and in future provide special
applications to mobile phones, ms²
plans to use Twitter and Blip, Futura is thinking of using Twitter,
Kampa would like to create a blog and communicate through Bluetooth, Ludwig is
trying to apply of methods and tools of communication, DOX will develop methods
that have been used so far, MSN will develop video resources available online,
and Modem uncritically claims that institution already uses all available
methods of communication.
Museums in the web –
conclusions
The first conclusion that comes to
mind after analysing above data is the high consciousness of the internet
communication among the majority of new art institutions. However, the
geographical diversification of this consciousness is worrying –
Many of the analysed institutions
draw close attention to visual features of their websites, to necessity of
regular updating, enriching with photos and videos and launching various
services which help in mobilizing a visitor and provide additional sources of
knowledge. CSW in
Introducing this kind of
applications and services for specific target groups not only helps in building
up resources of knowledge available through the websites, but also widening and
diversifying the offer what supports institution’s promotional value. Every
new initiative means an extra possibility of gaining new audience that will
stay in touch with the institution. Similarly to the development of the offer
prepared by museums in their real locations, especially to the educational
offer which has been in the centre of attention, as well as extra services
(e.g. Danubiana provides river transport from the centre of Bratislava to its
location on Danube peninsula), institutions improve the level of virtual
communication – they experiment with new tools (social services), provide
more and more materials on their websites (videos, complete catalogues of
collections). I executed similar research of museum websites twice in 2007,
however, on a different group of institutions. Because of a different selection
which also included museums founded before 1989 and also those not devoted
strictly to modern and contemporary art I cannot compare current results with
the previous ones. Nevertheless when looking at them all one can make a general
statement – situation has changed for better.
A museum website plays an important
communication role, it provides different kinds of information, it can have an
entertaining flavour, however, it is also a source of scholarly and specialist
knowledge (e.g. Ludwig Museum has not published yet the catalogue of its
collection in printed version and the whole spectrum of collection is available
online). In 2005 Canadian scholars in the research entitled Actual/Virtual Visits: What Are The Links?
asked Internet users for three main aims of a museums website. The hierarchy of
answers presented itself as follows: 1. provide information about
museum’s hours, events, services and facilities, 2. increase access to
the museum’s information and related resources, 3. provide information
that enhances your understanding or experience of the collections beyond what
is found in the physical museum 4. provide support for the museum’s
educational mission, 5. promotion/marketing, 6. provide support for the
museum’s research mission. I believe that the results can be regarded as
universal. I have also asked museum representatives to chose three most
important goals of their websites. The result is similar, however no
institution indicated support for its research mission: 1. provide information about museum’s
hours, events, services and facilities, 2. promotion/marketing, 3. increase
access to the museum’s information and related resources, 4. provide information that enhances your
understanding or experience of the collections beyond what is found in the physical
museum, ex aequo with: provide support for the museum’s
educational mission
Museums and art centres in