This week, @phillyhistroy asked my classmates and I to reflect on two loaded questions— What's broken in the cultural sector and how we think cultural resources might be re-allocated to fix it. Although I feel entirely unqualified to address either question, I think it’s important to consider the intended outcome of this project.
By consistently curating and publishing content, the @phillyhistory initiative will leverage its earned Steem and allocate those resources to various Philadelphia nonprofits. Although this creative strategy has great potential, it will ultimately challenge nonprofits to deviate from traditional methods. When we decide how to allocate our earned Steem, we will ask the winning organizations to 1) engage a non-conventional audience and 2) explore an unknown digital platform. These are both huge considerations especially in Philadelphia’s cultural sector.
Old School Solution
In previous classes, we discussed the over-utilized “old school” solutions epitomized by the new Museum of the American Revolution, Independence Hall, and National Constitution Center. Not only do all these institutions share similar topics and have huge physical footprints, but they also target visiting history enthusiasts as opposed to native Philadelphians. This strategy relies on name recognition to attract tourists instead of engaging local communities and interpreting immediately relevant work.
The Museum of the American Revolution opened in 2017. Image from Wikimedia Commons.
When we decide how to allocate our resources, we will invite institutions to a use a new platform with a very broad audience. In fact, it appears as though the overwhelming majority of Steemians do not have backgrounds in the cultural sector, and we should consider the willingness of these institutions to engage a non-conventional audience. We can determine their seriousness based on their mission statement and community outreach. Who is their audience? How do they communicate with the local community? These questions can provide insight to determine whether the institution seriously values innovative methods or whether they simply want the immediate funding.
Digital exploration
Even in 2018, not all institutions are entirely on board with digital accessibility. Nearly all nonprofits have a Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, or another social media account, but are they simply following the crowd? Or do they actually utilize these tools to engage new audiences and constructively provide information?
Most archives, libraries, and special collections across the city use some form of collections management software (ContentDM, Omeka, PastPerfect, etc.), but do they actually prioritize digital accessibility, or do they see this as a trivial "trend"? Although many institutions take on digitization projects and make some effort to produce digital content, for many, these projects are low priority and are pushed to the back burner. I imagine many institutions just want some form of digital content to say, "look at us, we're digital now, and that's cutting-edge!"
I think an institution's digital presence is perhaps the best indicator to determine whether or not they seriously appreciate this new form of funding. Just the term "cryptocurrency" will scare many potential candidates, but I imagine many will still apply because we have resources. We can determine whether the applicants appreciate unorthodox methods based on their digital presence. Do they actively engage an online audience? Do they prioritize digital projects? How often do they update their social media? The institutions have to convince us to invest in their future, but we must also convince them that this cryptocurrency is a viable investment in their time and future.
100% of the SBD rewards from this #explore1918 post will support the Philadelphia History Initiative @phillyhistory. This crypto-experiment conducted by graduate courses at Temple University's Center for Public History and MLA Program, is exploring history and empowering education. Click here to learn more.
Interesting thought that establishing how an institution already uses the digital will help determine if they're a good candidate for our reward. I feel like crypto is still new enough of a concept that it makes sense to give it somewhere that already has at least some digital experience. We want to encourage places to become more digital, but we also want to work with an institution that's more likely to understand what we're doing.
Exactly! We want to make sure they're somewhat invested in the digital.
Good thoughts about what would make an institution a good fit for Steem!
Thanks @Tmaust!
Interesting idea, assessing an organization's "digital IQ" as a way to strategically support advancement. Would you award funds generally or insist they be targeted to a specific activity?
I'd like to say "general activity." Make it broad enough for the organization to experiment, but also make sure they're trying new models for engagement.
Great discussion here @johnesmithiii. It might be worth exploring more of the potential behind SMTs or Smart Media Tokens. Towards the end of this year, non-profit based websites (of all types) will be able to "tokenize" their native content... through the Steem blockchain.
Boiling it down - you can earn cryptocurrency for content without ever having to visit or engage the Steemit.com audience. And that's pretty exciting, because it opens up the conversation / potential to empower content and existing networks.
https://smt.steem.io/
very interesting to consider the potential effects of the funding and how the funding was acquired.....
And while I don't think that every institution needs to use digital means to provide info nor is it necessarily the best way for them to use resources. in some cases yes but some no, but it's a good question to consider.
Also, it could be that this crypto funding will enable an institution to consider completely new paradigms regardless of whether they've previously used any digital technology with any particular agility.