am-i-on-yet

[am-i-on-yet]

Conclusions, Recommendations, and Questions

Through interviews and my immersion, I discovered that the personalities of institutional social media are dictated by the job description, institution, and location. 

I have discovered that by being always-on I have developed a deeper relationship to these institutions and have realized the potential they hold in engaging audiences. 

Finally, I have discovered that as the technology develops I can see these social media accounts interact and engage with viewers in new ways, as long as museum staff are willing to adapt. 

I would like to leave you with a few questions for the road that could take this study further:

What would the benefits be in allowing education programs to create Facebook Live events?  

What would an Instagram Swap look like in Chicago and its diverse neighborhoods?

What sort of engagement opportunities are available through social media tracks such as Pinterest?

[am-i-on-yet]

The day has come #saic MAAE #graduate symposium. These amazing women have been my support group, my partners in crime, my food buddies, and they are all women I look up to. I can not stress enough what they have accomplished. The issues they tackled, the time they dedicated and the love they expressed. They have made me feel like I can accomplish anything and I will be forever grateful @becca.beaird @laurengoes28 @melomarie @iga_puch

[am-i-on-yet]

All are Welcome

On the morning of November 9th, 2016 it seemed as if the world had stopped making sense. To many, it seemed as if we were stuck in a dream that would soon end. Many individuals no longer knew where they stood, or where they would be safe. There were confusion and tension among people, and these emotions drew out different reactions. You could see it on your friend’s face, your family’s tone, your coworker’s attitude. You saw it clearly over social media, where people expressed their sorrow, their anger, and their disappointment. But you also saw their support, their love, their understanding, and their efforts for those who no longer felt safe. And as I watched, I noticed some museums were no different.

On the day before the election, a majority of the museums I followed urged their audiences to go and vote. The following day, a few museums attempted to offer some sort of comfort in relation to the results. But what sort of comfort could a building provide? Below I have included the first Instagram posts of two of the contemporary museums I followed from the day after the election.

New Museum: “Today more than ever, we continue to take heart in the power of art to transform consciousness, to educate, to foster empathy and to help us look to the future.”

Museum of Contemporary Art Chicago: “If you are feeling stressed today after the election, here is a calming seascape from Hiroshi Sugimoto's ‘Time Exposed’ Series”

Those within certain museums took this opportunity to express that their institution was a place to feel safe; that all were welcome. Work that took a stand was showcased, redisplayed, or redirected by the artist. For example, after the Inauguration, January 20th 2017, The Institute of Contemporary Art in Boston shared Nari Ward’s “We the People,” 2011 (a piece spelling out those words in shoelaces) with the caption “strength in numbers.” Words of acceptance were posted, expressing the human side of these institutions, reminding us that museums are made up of individuals that take part in their community. One remarkable case that still sits with me was a panel hosted by the New Museum in New York City that consisted of lawyers, activists, and organizers discussing “what are your rights when it comes to civil disobedience and protest”.  The New Museum also hosted free legal clinics about rights under the new administration, providing a turn in the expert voice not only applies to art but art in relation to the law and civil rights. It was a time when museums were using themselves as a platform to offer opportunities to members, artists, and followers to feel safe and be proactive.

Some institutions chose to remain silent when it came to personal political views, understandably not taking sides or assuming one opinion for all who make up the museum. It is important to remember that an art museum is a public institution that is meant to educate and engage their visitors through art and for certain institutions it may not seem their place to make a declaration that could potentially upset members, staff, and followers. However, these museums continued to function as a place of normalcy, a space that continued to reach out to anyone who was interested, possibly to be the calm atmosphere many looks for in times of uncertainty.  

[am-i-on-yet]

What You Will Find

The purpose of this research is to better understand how art museums utilize social media to engage audiences beyond their walls. Museums employ platforms such as Instagram, Twitter, and Facebook to portray an online institutional voice, offering their audience members expert information and behind-the-scenes perspectives. I explored how this development impacts museum authority; allowing visitors to follow favorited museums, publicly interpret work, and exchange ideas and experiences with friends and strangers.

For this research, I constructed new social media accounts for the three previously mentioned platforms to follow ten institutions, immersively, for one month. My goal was to learn about their social media personalities and voices, pursuing my main question: how do art museums use contemporary social media to create and maintain enriching relationships with those who maintain an always-on lifestyle? This research is further guided by the following subquestions: How is the art museum’s targeted demographic legible in their online presence? How does the content of social media reflect the mission, vision, and goals of the corresponding institutions? How will my personal experiences and relationships with the chosen institutions change during and after participating in an always-on lifestyle?

I established a systematic process to interact with the accounts of ten encyclopedic and contemporary art museums located in the Northeast and Midwest. I considered the content produced and how content was adapted via each platform. As the immersion progressed, I reflected on how my relationship and understanding of the institution shifted. I discovered how I yearned for institutions to offer more than purely encyclopedic facts and, in doing so, I felt more part of their community, even across and through distance.

In order to understand the museums’ intentions I interviewed three social media managers from separate institutions. In these conversations we discussed the goals of the institution as well as the portrayal of an institutional face and personality to the public in relation to social media.

During this process, I realized that the rise of social media has significantly changed how individuals may interact with museums, and how museums may engage viewers and broaden audiences. Followers have new authority to ask questions, contribute interpretations and knowledge, and feel connected to the museum within or beyond their communities. Museum educators can examine and reflect upon the limitations of their current social media use in order to better understand how to create and maintain lasting relationships with their audiences.

[am-i-on-yet]

You Have My Thanks

I would like to extend my deepest thanks to all of those who have supported me during this thesis process. To my friends who patiently sat and listened to my explanations, ideas, and challenges from start to finish, being my second set of eyes and offering areas of clarification. To the School of the Art Institute of Chicago staff who offered their expertise, assistance, and time. And above all, I would like to thank my loving family. To my dad who always told me I could do and accomplish whatever I set my mind to. To my mommom who was always ready to send homemade treats when I was feeling overwhelmed. To my brother who has long been my best friend. To my stepmom showing me that you can rock graduate school in style. Most importantly, to my mom who I know in my heart would be so proud of what I have accomplished.

[am-i-on-yet]

Introduction

Through the rise of social media, users have become connected to family, friends, like-minded individuals, and institutions that embody their interests. When producing online content, museums have outgrown relying on their own website and have moved to platforms such as Instagram, Twitter, and Facebook (to name the three relevant to my research). This decision has provided the opportunity to engage visitors in a unique way, as well expand what is classified as a visitor to include virtual guests who may not physically come through the door.

To explore the idea of how social media can be used to further engage visitors while also creating and maintaining relationships, I will first explore the traditional views and values of visitor engagement within museums. The first section, Traditional Views and Values of Visitor Engagement within Museums, defines engagement, explains what factors make it meaningful, and shows how engagement changes when participation is voluntary rather than forced. Within this discussion, I explore how museums attempt to tailor an experience, and therefore create a shift in how content is displayed.

This conversation surrounding traditional approaches leads into the second theme: The Effects of Social Media on Visitor Engagement. Within this section, I bring together sources that discuss how museums have implemented social media into their process, how these platforms have changed engagement, and how to best choose a platform to appropriately portray the desired subjects and content. I have outlined the platforms that pertain to my research, the “dos” and “don’ts” from social media managers, and the goals and aspirations of institutions implementing social media tactics.

With museums embracing a social media presence, it is important to understand the new relationship between institutions and their audiences. The final theme, A New Authority: Relationship and Ownership Between Museum and Visitor, explores the concept of digital natives and digital immigrants versus those within the cohort participating in always-on lifestyle. Social media has changed a passive audience into an active one that demands a conversation and asks questions, therefore changing the authority of the museum in response to the visitor claiming ownership of the space.

To view either of the three topics individually explore these tags in the search bar: 

#Visitor Engagement Within Museums 

#Social Media on Visitor Engagement 

#A New Authority

[am-i-on-yet]

Traditional Views and Values of Visitor Engagement within Museums:

While studying and working within museums one becomes familiar with the phrase visitor engagement. The term engagement itself becomes a buzzword within the museum world, one that you expect to hear and one you discuss to make it seem as if you are aware of exactly what is happening. There are studies and methods to track visitor engagement, or how individuals are interacting with an exhibit. Staff members can interview visitors upon exiting, follow a particular visitor around, or track where visitors stop and for how long to find out what works and what could be improved upon for next time.

But what does visitor or audience engagement mean? It shouldn't be assumed that anyone who chooses to go to a museum will be giving the museum their attention, so museums need to actively encourage visitors to focus on the works they will encounter. A museum’s audience could participate in a conversation, an interactive, or an interaction with the work itself. Many museums today choose to go the way of an interactive — an activity (often digital) that pertains to a specific gallery exhibit and invites the visitor to create or learn further. This flashy aspect may draw someone in, however, there is a risk that the entertaining factor will overshadow the show itself. For example, Rebecca Hertz (2014), director of the Peoria Playhouse Children's Museum, took her twelve-year-old daughter to a jewelry and photography show that was paired with an auto-selfie booth, where her daughter took picture after picture. This activity attracted and held the attention of the young girl for a majority of their visit time, but the immediacy of the activity became the more memorable than the experience of the entire show.

The concept of “Flow Theory”, developed by Mihalyi Csikezentmihalyi (1975), explores the intrinsic, deep, and uninterrupted process of engagement that occurs during especially motivating activities. These activities engage individuals on the grounds that they are involved and encourages participants to want to do them not because of any particular favorable outcome but because of the involvement itself. Often, an individual is so engrossed in the activity at hand that they lose track of time, giving the activity their full attention. This type of experience has been termed flow and is possible under certain circumstances when there is a “merging of action and awareness” (Schweinle, 2008, p.126). The interactive pertaining to Hertz’s daughter is a failed meaningful visitor engagement that could be described as fun by her daughter, but the fun of the immediate activity did not translate into the intended absorbed state of engagement.

Engagement, to achieve the flow concept, needs to develop a balance of challenge and skills. Schweinle (2008) outlines four major categories of experiences: low challenge with low skill that produces apathy, low challenge with high skill that produces relaxation, high challenge with low skill that produces anxiety, and high skill with high challenge that produces the optimal flow experience. There was no challenge in the auto-selfie photo booth, so Hertz’s daughter did not leave that activity with questions or the feeling of overcoming a challenge. So what was the museum’s goal with this activity? What did they want the visitor to feel and experience when they left this portion of the show if not to challenge the visitor? Without having a concrete answer to these questions, the interactive was doomed to be unsuccessful.

If museums want to create a space for challenges and “engage visitors-to inspire passion, and interest in self-directed learning beyond the museum” (Hertz, 2014, para. 13), they need to explore and better understand their audiences. Who is coming to the museum? What is the goal of this particular exhibit? And how can the engagement be a way to reinforce interaction with objects on view in relation to the exhibition goal? Before diving too deep into a particular engagement factor one should look at the concept of the “entrance narrative,” a term that can be found in an article by Pekarik and Doering (1996) called “Questioning the Entrance Narrative,” published in The Journal of Museum Education. The entrance narrative is described as every visitor coming with his or her own experiences and interpretations that contribute to how they interact with the exhibits. According to these two authors, "the most satisfying exhibitions for visitors will be those that resonate with their experience and provide information in ways that confirm and enrich their view of the world" (Pekarik, p. 261).

Operating with the understanding of the entrance narrative can be difficult if the information given is radically against what this individual believes to be true. That individual may choose to ignore the information or even get angry. Museums have been known as a stable environment pertaining to the agreed truth, where debate does not exist because experts provided the information given. However, it is important for visitors to question information presented to them and to feel comfortable questioning an expert’s source to further a conversation. Museums need to present the opportunity for greater questions, where the visitor engages with the exhibit, asks why it is there, and seeks to understand the position of the developer of the content (Pekarik, 1996).

How can museums engage visitors in a way that incorporates or questions their entrance narrative in an enticing way, even if that way does not fit with the normal description of “fun”? In other words, a museum experience needs to stand out from all the others. Many museums have different ways of accomplishing this. Reed Rozan (n.d) director of Audience Engagement at the Worcester Art Museum talked with fellow engagement pioneers: Amie Chang of UC Berkeley, Allison Agsten of HAMMER Museum, and Hanna Cho of the Museum of Vancouver.  The topic of the conversation pertained to what engagement meant to each individual and their institution as well as how engagement relates to museums now and in the future. How can a museum be inviting and engaging to all of its community and those who visit their institution?

The idea that everyone is meant to feel welcome within the museum is discussed in depth in Excellence and Equity: Education and the Public Dimension of the Museum (1998). This report outlines the responsibility of a task force of the American Association of Museums (AAM) to consider critical issues in museum education and to outline the role of museums within its community.  The report focuses on three main ideas; first regarding the importance of education, second showing how a museum is enriched by the diversity of its community and as a whole must become more inclusive, and third explaining the need for a commanding leadership within the museum’s community. It is the museum’s responsibility to “engage in active, ongoing, collaborative efforts with a wide spectrum of organizations and individuals who can contribute to the expansion of the museum’s public dimension” (Hirzy, p.81). As time passes, museums need to be able to evolve with their audience and continue to take strides to best educate the diverse people of their community.  

Savage-Yamazaki describes in Engage: The Future of Museums (2014) the reports from a roundtable discussion focusing on audience engagement and the role of the museum within the community. He states that "creating a comprehensive approach to partnering and cross-breeding programming should align with the mission of the museum and its role in the community. Participants felt there was an opportunity in expanding beyond the confines of the institution" (Savage-Yamazaki, 2014, p.15). The role museums have within the community in relation to an advertisement, program, and partnership is being adjusted to go beyond just the institution to appeal to a larger set of people, including those who may not enter their institution.

An engaging learning experience within a museum has taken a shift from that of a traditional educational environment. As Allison Agsten states in her interview with Rozan (n.d), the importance in connecting visitors with the institution through art projects that value the relationship is paramount, or as Aimee Chang states "there is a shift to include participation and real-time person-to-person exchange as part of the museum experience" (Rozan, para. 7). There is more emphasis on the exchange of knowledge or experience than on one person in a position of authority telling the visitor what he or she needs to know. People want to be valued for the things they know and want to be challenged on the things they may not (sometimes by a peer). This concept makes the idea of an exchange satisfying in a networked world. Hanna Co of the Museum in Vancouver touches on this idea when asked by Rozan to describe audience engagement in relation to museums.

[am-i-on-yet]

The growing attention and profile given to audience engagement in museums, is simply a way to describe a fundamental reset and desire for relevance in a changing cultural field. Focusing on engagement is a vital way for museums as institutions to adapt in an increasingly decentered and networked society.

Rozan, n.d. para. 19 

[am-i-on-yet]

The Effects of Social Media on Visitor Engagement:

"What if there was a place where we could learn more about the experiences of people who are totally different from us?" Nina Simon (2014) eloquently asks in "Learning Cultural Competency Through Social Media". The world wide web is one of those places where the responsibility is placed on the receiver of information. It is the one who uses the Internet who needs to be aware of the level of truth within what they are reading. This can be intimidating when used incorrectly, which can reinforce stereotypes and hurt people. However, it also creates an open atmosphere that can hold an unthinkable amount of possibilities. With this in mind, Simon used social media to discover what she did not know about her local Latino communities, filtering out areas that reinforced what she already knew. One side of the extreme on continual access to the network and information plays into stigma and reinforces preexisting beliefs. However, the other side creates an open forum to new ideas and breeds more savvy surveyors that may be able to influence exhibition content.

The three major platforms that museums have begun to use to their advantage to get in touch with possible viewers are Twitter, Facebook, and Instagram. In 2004, Mark Zuckerberg developed Facebook as a way for people to share and connect with others in a personal way around the world. In 2010, Kevin Systrom and Mike Krieger founded Instagram, which inspires creativity through a dominated visual platform that “has become the home for visual storytelling for everyone” (Instagram, n.d, About). Both sites have grown to include millions of users that are connected through these platforms with the goal of sharing content. Museums have the same goal, and many institutions now have professional pages on each site to convey the voice of their museum to a greater public.

Out of the three possible platforms, museums were initially drawn to Twitter, which was developed in 2006 by Jack Dorsey in San Francisco with the mission “to give everyone the power to create and share ideas and information instantly, without barriers” (Twitter, n.d. About). Twitter was the first medium through which museums had the opportunity to expand their reach, allowing them to provide information about their services beyond their community to those across the country and the world. In 2010, a collection of essays was published by MuseumEtc called Twitter for Museums: Strategies and Tactics for Success to provide the framework for museums to create a presence on this rapidly growing method of communication. Today, Twitter has over 313 million active users, eighty-two percent of which are active on mobile devices each month, providing museums with “a fantastic opportunity to provide everyone else with fresh, exciting content and distinctive modes of engagement” (Allen-Greil, p. 169).

Through each platform, a voice needs to be created that represents the entire institution. A museum is made up of a multitude of individuals with unique jobs and knowledge, and the more their unique views can be expressed, the more engaged the audience will be. Allowing followers to get connected to the different departments that make up an institution by including a variety of information from the museum staff provides an inside look at an institution that a user may not be able to get anywhere else. Through these multiple perspectives, it is still important to maintain a consistent writing style to avoid confusing or overwhelming the reader.

In 2009 Nina Simon conducted an interview with The Science Center in Columbus, Ohio (COSI) to talk to David Chesebrough (CEO), Kevin Pfefferie (Web Manager), and Kelli Nowinsky (Public Relations Manager) about the emergence of social media and how they believed it would be playing a part in their institution. These individuals expressed how their social media projects were mission-driven and aligned with their institutional goals. The staff was trusted to engage appropriately in the platforms that supported and added value to the museum. The end goal of COSI’s usage was to create a concept I will refer to as Museums as Listeners. Nowinsky states “At the end of the day, our goal is to be better listeners. We have already had fabulous customer service and these tools allow us to respond even faster" (Simon, 2009, para. 26). In this way, social media platforms are used to engage with individuals and listen to what is needed. This form of listening results in a new opportunity for responsiveness for institutions; to accept information rather than just give it.

Even in the beginning, those at the COSI were excited about the prospects of this method and open to whatever could happen. They embraced the platform and Nowinsky stated, "If you're a user of the tools, it's part of your life, and it's not going to go away" (Simon, 2009, para. 25). This excitement evolved over the years, causing strategies to develop out of experimentation and uncertainties. Kristina Fong was the Walker's Marketing and Audience Research Coordinator, but when social media was introduced to the museum she was handed a new title: Digital Marketing Associate. Fong held this position for two years, and upon leaving she shared tips with her replacement, also publishing a few of them on the museum's page. Alongside knowing your museum like the back of your hand, being a good writer, and being able to develop a voice over the internet, one needs to understand that ‘Likes' and followers matter.  These likes aren't the deciding factor of everything, but they do indicate your growing audience. If your engagement numbers (comments, likes, conversations) aren't going up, it could mean that your audience is bored. As the producer of social media content, it is your job to produce something interesting every day, something that drives people to choose to interact with it (pertaining to the Flow concept).

Social media is not separated from the rest of the departments; it is connected back to the other departments and traditional media. If the social media department were isolated, the content it produced would be flat and the audience would not have the ability to engage with the institution and its variety of departments. Jasper Visser from “The Museum of the Future” wrote that it’s about being “connected with the activities you do and the expositions you host” (Visser, 2011, par. 2). The job of a social media manager is to produce subject matter that highlights certain aspects of the institution and touches on a variety of interests to entice new visitors, while also being engaging enough to encourage existing ones to come back.

This new media has the same responsibilities as that of traditional media to engage and encourage individuals to physically visit. Visser lays out three ways in which a museum conducts itself. The first is through media (contemporary and traditional), the second is through activities and events, and the third through the actual exhibits within the building. All of these components are working to get individuals to visit, however not everyone can walk through the doors of a particular institution for a variety of reasons: location, financial challenges, not wanting to go alone, and possibly even building capacity. This is where media comes in; individuals who cannot otherwise come to the institution can stay informed and even participate through media allowing the institution to reach more people.

When developing a media strategy it is important to figure out the goal for each post produced as well as the overall goal. Media, new and contemporary, are about moving people from one phase to another: engaging through media, attending an event, visiting your institution. Individuals can move up and down through these stages, but simply moving up is not the museums’ only goal. To do this one must consider what media type best accomplishes this task, as Fong mentions that each platform works best for a specific purpose. Therefore, to sync multiple accounts (have content post immediately across Twitter, Tumblr, and Facebook) will do you a disservice. Even though there are systems in place to connect a few of the major forms of social media together, to make producing content easier for the everyday user, it is a poor strategy for museums who wish to engage their audiences.  Everyone interacts with social media differently and everyone interacts with the different platforms differently, meaning individuals want to see a different type of content from platform to platform. Consider an individual follows an institution on all three platforms— three different opportunities are presented to engage this user and they instead witnessed the same content three different times, so have now decided to only check in through one.

As the producer of social media content, it is unwise to go crazy producing post after post after post. As a part of the social media strategy, one needs to come up with the amount of content to create daily on each platform, remembering to make every post interesting so as to not bore the visitors. Fong wrote that on occasion she needs to remind other departments that have a social media page not to overload their followers by posting photos and event announcements one after the other and dominate their followers’ feed. Viewers need some breathing room, some time away for he or she to relax their mind and become ready to engage with the next object or event. If they are overloaded they may choose to simply start ignoring an institution or become frustrated with the content, effectively turning them away, in other words, “You have to look at the world outside your world” (Fong, 2013, para. 13).

[am-i-on-yet]

You have to look at the world outside your world

(Fong, 2013, para. 13).

[am-i-on-yet]

A New Authority: Relationship and Ownership Between Museum and Visitor

Mac Prensky (2001), author of “Digital Natives, Digital Immigrants”, highlighted how students, even a decade ago, were thinking about and processing information fundamentally differently from their predecessors as a result of being surrounded by new technology. The author compares these digital natives with older generations, who are learning and adopting new technology, naming them digital immigrants. The digital natives are those who fall within the Millennial generation and are native speakers of the digital language that “our students have changed radically. Today’s students are no longer the people our education system was designed for” (p. 1). These individuals are masters at multi-tasking and are accustomed to receiving information at a fast rate.

The text “Digital Natives, Digital Immigrants” focuses on the responsibility of teachers to keep up with their students, even though the teachers are not of the digital native generation. Digital native has become a term commonly used when discussing those who grew up in a digital age. However, this definition is limiting and can be used to enforce stereotypes of a certain generation, particularly the stereotype that if one was born into this generation then one is, therefore, comfortable with the technology as it is presented to him or her, even though a younger individual may be limited financially to the technology provided by an older individual.

In contrast to Prensky’s correlation of technology and their participants, Danah Boyd (2012) explored the concept of individuals who are accustomed to the use of technology in “Participating in an Always on Lifestyle.” “Participating in the Always on Lifestyle” explores the difference between those who would be considered always-on and those who wouldn’t. Always-On is summed up as someone who is not necessarily always on or off the Internet, but is always connected to the network, meaning that when needed information is just around the corner, it can be easily accessed. Boyd explains that she is “procontext. Different social context mean different relationships to being always-on. They are not inherently defined by space but by social construction of context in my own head… I’m not interruptible because connection often means context shift, and only certain context shifts are manageable” (p. 72). One may not be able to be reached all the time, not because of any issue of access, but because any given connection using technology requires a context shift, and only certain ones are manageable at any given time or place. To put it simply, an Always-On individual would be able to use the Internet on their mobile device to help a conversation, but at the same time would not allow an incoming message to distract them from the person they are conversing with in that moment.

This text explores what is considered on-line and how the definition has gotten broader with the expansion of technology. Boyd seriously questions how many hours of the day one spends online and wonders if sleeping next to one’s iPhone counts as being connected since it is consciously within reach. Boyd explains her questions as “it is no longer on or off really. It’s about living in a world where being networked to people and information wherever and whenever is just assumed” (p. 71).

Boyd mentions the generational idea of digital natives within her text and states that the always-on is not a clean generational cut; those of a younger generation may choose not to be always connected to the network and others. It is a lifestyle based on values. These values may simply be not attractive to someone of any generation, while fascinating to those of another. She instead relates the always-on lifestyle as a subcultural practice. It is not “about consumption and production of content but also about creating an ecosystem in which people can stay peripherally connected to one another through a variety of microdata” (p. 73).  It is a community that is built based on the same goals and values, one that is understood by those who participate. It is a give and take, offering opinions to continue the exchange of ideas and looking for someone else to expand the conversation.

With the rise of social media and the ability to find information immediately comes a new audience, one that is no longer passive. Mark Thompson, director of BBC, uses the term active audience within “The People Formerly Known as the Audience” by Jay Rosen (2012), describing those who do not simply want to sit back and only absorb information, but seek to debate and communicate. Rosen draws attention to how media has changed from being run by an elite entity that can censor and edit to being influenced by the will of the people. Rosen points out that the audience still wants its Big Media business, but it is no longer on their time.

The concept of Big Media that Rosen describes can be related to the development of the online presence of museum institutions. This system was used in the beginning to inform individuals what the institution thought the visitor needed to know in an outwardly one-way manner.  However, with the rise of social media came hashtags, a mode of tagging that links an individual to an institution, and through its use begins a conversation. Rosen explains “We graduate from wanting media when we want it to wanting it without the filter, to wanting media to be way better than it is, to publishing and broadcasting ourselves when it meets a need or sounds like fun” (p. 14). An individual has the ability to follow, question, and personalize their media consumption.

This new active audience questions the authority of institutions like the museum, by simply questioning the content of museums. Nina Simon, Executive Director of the Santa Cruz Museum of Art and History and Author of The Participatory Museum, wrote “one of the primary fears museum professionals (and all professionals) have about entering new relationships with audiences is the fear of losing control” (2008, para. 2). With the use of social media, those engaged with the museum are presented with the ability to publicly ask questions that demand answers, to make statements, to rate the work, to critique what they see, and to share their experiences. Within “Future of Authority: Platform Power”, Simon outlines how museums can look to companies like YouTube, or other user-generated content sites, as examples of how a set of rules allows museums to retain authority in regards to values and behavior, but also provides users with authority to ask and engage.

Museums are no longer in complete control of the visitors’ experience. Visitors want to interpret content on their own or with others through a conversation; they want to create responses and reinterpret work. The museums have taken on a platform to harness this reality and to offer a place where they welcome the visitors’ questions and comments. Going through galleries, one can start to notice the museum-generated hashtags and encouragements to interact through one of their social media platforms. It gives the museum an opportunity to offer a voice to a variety of staff of their institution, each offering their own expertise for discussion. For example, many museums are offering questions for a curator, or videos from preservation, or samples of gallery tours. Suddenly a museum can become personable.

These platforms have offered museums another way to connect to their audience as well market their institution, Simon states that one of the “greatest powers retained by these platforms is the power to feature content that reflects the values of the platform...most find ways to feature the kind of content and behavior that they want to see modeled for other users” (Simon, 2008, para. 12). What a museum chooses to display to their audience creates a relationship, either one that is open to communication or one of an encyclopedia, with the authoritative voice of an expert. By making an impact on a visitor that encourages that visitor to follow an institution on one of the social media sites, it opens that visitor to continuously engage with any new content the institution produces.

Social media is seen as a way to keep people engaged, to include them in on the conversation by allowing visitors to see some behind-the-scenes action. It allows the institution to hold a mix of voices from educational to personal depending on the conversation. The New York Times published a story written by Carol Vogel (2011) titled “The Spirit of Sharing,” which explores social media within museums through conversing with a variety of staff from different museums. Vogel interviewed the chief technology officer of the Brooklyn Museum, who stated:

We want people to feel ownership of this museum. We ask them to tell us what they think. They can give us a bad review; when we make a mistake they can come to our rescue. We want to engage with our community. (para. 6)

No matter the online presence, the goal of social media is to get individuals into the institution and for them to be engaged with the art in that moment. However, it is not possible for everyone to make it through the doors of a particular museum — location, free time, and finances are just a few obstacles that could keep anyone away. Vogel stated in The New York Times that in 2010 the Indianapolis Museum of Art received 430,000 visitors, however, the engagement through their website, where visitors can view the museum’s collection and interact with videos and blogs, was close to one million individuals. The online presence of museums is easily accessible, and social media has supplied more options in communicating and engaging with visitors, even those who may never set foot into the institution. Museums are under pressure to continuously supply interesting content to snag new visitors as well as keep existing ones.

[am-i-on-yet]

Every generation has to find the right modes of communication, and if it helps open doors it’s a good thing.

Thomas Campbell, Director, Metropolitan Museum of Art (Campbell, 2011, cited in Vogel, 2011, para. 12)

[am-i-on-yet]

Conclusion

Each topic that has developed through my academic research has also informed my autoethnographic research. These have inspired me to put down my personal social media accounts and develop entirely new ones surrounding ten art museums in the pursuit of discovering what lengths these institutions were using social media to and in hopes to deepen my relationship with them. This study has gotten me out of Chicago, both physically and through emails, to chat with those who are in charge of creating the content that I have followed and digested.

Before I could extend my knowledge to contemporary engagement through social media I had to discover traditional views and values of visitor engagement with museums. This first section explores how museums have traditionally pursued engagement and how engagement is classified as meaningful when it holds a life outside the initial activity. I have pulled from sources that show that even though museums try to dictate experiences within their institution, they cannot predict how someone’s entrance narrative can change the way the exhibition is interpreted. This section concludes with Savage-Yamazaki’s suggestions to expand the role of the institution to appeal to a larger group of people and to challenge visitors in a way that drives them to actively participate.   

Through The Effects of Social Media on Visitor Engagement section, I have discussed the three social media platforms that pertain to my study (Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram) and how they relate to museums, providing another platform to display institutional goals. Museums have developed strategies to use social media to attract new visitors as well as maintain existing ones. These strategies are always changing, and while exploring this section and the conversations with museum professionals from 2009 when Twitter was first being implemented at COSI and 2013 from the Walker Art Center’s previous social media manager, I decided to reach out to a number of institutions within my autoethnographic research and discuss their social media presence today.

Within the final section, A New Authority: Relationship and Ownership Between Museum and Visitor, the conversation focused on how social media has provided a platform for audiences to ask questions and hold conversations pertaining to museum content, changing the nature of the museum’s authority over a visitor’s experience. Boyd explored a different approach to one’s relationship with the network through an always-on lifestyle that is not generationally limited as Prensky’s concept of the digital native.  This notion guided the fieldwork of my research, to embrace the always-on persona and make the conscious effort to connect through a variety of networks. Being one who passively used the network through a shallow method, I was interested to see what this lifestyle meant, how it would enhance my experience with specific culture, and if once “living in an always-on environment you really notice what’s missing when you are not” (p.73).

[am-i-on-yet]

[am-i-on-yet]

@whitneymuseum love that it is open all day and so late! Offering some very needed conversations #trending ・・・ On Friday, January 20, the Whitney will be open from 10:30 am to 10 pm, and admission will be pay-what-you-wish all day. We'll be offering programming that reflects the Museum's commitment to open dialogue, civic engagement, and the diversity of American art and culture. We hope you join us! [🎥 by @bgancsos]

[am-i-on-yet]

Loved seeing all of the shoes from Pleasure and Pain @peabodyessex from French silk to 3D printed all amazing, I esspecially enjoyed the area visitors could sit in lush leather chairs and explore books at their own pace before moving on. (at Peabody Essex Museum)

[am-i-on-yet]

Wanna get lost in this type of Wonderland @massmoca #trending #arteducation ・・・ Not many shows are measured in acres. This one is. Visit Sol LeWitts maze of Wall Drawings. Pictured: Wall Drawing #692