label

reflection

Linked to 26 items

from: Accessibility and Inclusion (report)

Martijn’s group concentrated on identifying and addressing wayfinding and cognitive needs within digital platforms. They recognized that individuals visiting such platforms often have platformsspecific goals in mind, underscoring the reflectionimportance of designing public technology with a user-centric approach. This discussion underscored theaccessibilitysignificance of transparency in translating diverse content into accessible media, emphasizing the need tochallengeset boundaries and recognize our limitations. The group highlighted examples of successful integration of physical and digital spaces, drawing on inclusioncultural spaces in Belgium where a tread goes through the space as illustrative case studies.
from: Between Utopia and Dystopia (report)

Maaike underscored that digital transformation is a policy priority in the Netherlands, prompting the question of the urgency behind such transformation. One point she emphasized was the reflectionabundance of digital artworks not exhibited in museums and whether these should be collected. There’s a noticeable shift in audience behavior, especially among interesting-practiceyounger demographics, who increasingly prefer digital accessibility and other cultural references. A prime example is Travis Scott's virtual concert in Fortnite. Even prior to the Covid pandemic, interesting-practicefewer people were visiting cultural organizations like theaters. Instead, popular forms of entertainment such as live music and podcasts have garnered significant popularity. Furthermore, Maaike highlighted the role of AI in shaping this shift in art creation and consumption, citing examples such as the writers’ strike in the US and corresponding legal changes.
from: Between Utopia and Dystopia (report)

During Bert’s presentation, the central query revolved around questiondefining the nature of a collective, interactive digital space. He posed questions regarding its design and formation: questionshould it be carefully constructed or allowed to organically evolve? Bert emphasized the necessity for traditional organizations to transition into this new digital realm. Conversely, platformsfor the makers present, digital is their natural habitat—a native environment where creativity flourishes effortlessly. Bert highlighted the tendency for interesting-practiceeach cultural institution to develop its own digital platform, leading to fragmentation. While this diversity fosters learning, he questioned whether reflectionresources could be better shared for the benefit of the broader audience. He drew parallels to a shared railway system, suggesting that opinionfragmentation might not be advantageous for the cultural sector or the public at large.
from: Between Utopia and Dystopia (report)
from: Between Utopia and Dystopia (report)

During the discussion, K questioned reflectionwhether collectivity is solely expressed online or if it can also extend to physical spaces. Other participants argued that while opinionindividuals may come together for a common goal, it doesn't necessarily constitute a collective. M emphasized the necessity of collaboration, citing the sharing of knowledge about audiences as an example. Additionally, it was noted that it’s dystopiachallenging to attract "narrow" culture users to explore new domains or worlds. While this may be difficult in physical spaces, the dynamic may differ in the digital realm.
from: Between Utopia and Dystopia (report)

In the discussion, the reflectionhierarchy between traditional and 'infinite' digital culture was explored alongside the potential benefits. A suggested the opinionimportance of involving programmers and directors from traditional institutes to showcase the possibilities of digital culture, while M emphasized the opinionurgency of showcasing the new generation of makers and their role in driving transformation. H questioned reflectionwhether an opportunistic approach could be effective, to which M affirmed the need for a clear vision and inspiration for organizations. H further inquired about the reflectionbest method to change a director's perspective, with M noting the importance of demonstrating added value and considering associated costs. A proposed opinionframing digital as inherently physical to sway minds, while Angelique advocated for critical examination of existing digital practices.
from: Between Utopia and Dystopia (report)

The brainstorming session on this question spurred the need to delve into additional inquiries, particularly regarding the reflectionpotential integration of existing programs and strategies, as well as reflectionmethods for attracting audiences to digital collections in compelling ways.
from: Between Utopia and Dystopia (report)

K expressed concerns regarding the fleeting nature of trendy platforms and pondered reflectionwhether new structures or content are necessary to maintain user interest, noting the platformsneed for continuous new experiences. In response, R metaphorically metaphorquestioned if a new train track is required for every new train, sparking a discussion about the significance of organizational frameworks. G reflected on this discussion by proposing an intriguing concept where interactions within a system, similar to how the color of a train changes based on what’s communicated through a microphone, could mutually influence one another. This idea leads to considering reflectionhow makers could showcase their work within such a system. H contributed to the debate by extending the train track metaphor, noting that the underlying technology has remained largely unchanged for a significant period. This underscores the importance of platformsconsidering foundational elements and the influence of commercial foundations on the resulting products, emphasizing that every element is built upon the initial idea.
from: Between Utopia and Dystopia (report)

G emphasized the concept of interesting-practicegatherings where individuals bring their own chairs, illustrating a sense of community and participation beyond traditional structures. This prompted a discussion on reflectionwhether audiences are evolving into makers themselves, to which G responded affirmatively, noting a definite shift towards greater participation. The conversation challenged conventional notions of audience roles, suggesting that certain metaphors necessitate a more active and participatory role from the audience, thereby reshaping traditional dynamics.
from: Digital Space is... (report)

During the feedback session, participants noted some areas for improvement. They indicated that there were reflectioninconsistencies in the terminology used on each poster, raising questions about their interrelation. Rogier answered that there was a consensus that today’s activities would clarify these issues, acknowledging that they were working on the same topic from different perspectives. Moreover, participants found it challenging to challengeapply their ideas due to the multiple layers involved, leading to extensive questioning. They highlighted the importance of sharing with care and ensuring that the themes and questions presented serve as a recap of the overall sessions. Additionally, participants aimed to show DEN that the “black scenario” do not align with what creators want and need. The most important objective for the day was to have a meaningful discussion and collaborate effectively with DEN.
from: Digital Space is... (report)

Jonas raised the question of questionwhat can attract people to such initiatives and whether knowing where they are helps. Soyun noted that while people are fluid, opinionfeeling grounded by participating in something can be appealing. Kwan added that although some are accustomed to fluid spaces, not everyone is willing to dive in; opinionlabels and systems can provide comfort, pointing to the need for balancing digital literacy with concrete actions. Soyun appreciated that this conversation is already taking place. Moreover, Jonas wondered about reflectionbreaking assumptions regarding physical, hybrid, and online spaces. Phillip emphasized the opinionimportance of understanding the materiality of experiences, as digital media always has a physical component.
from: Digital Space is... (report)

Angelique raised the question of questionhow accessibility solutions can be made bidirectional. Alice emphasized the opinionimportance of following a UX workflow that includes people from various roles—organizations, curators, artists, and especially a team of accessibility experts. Decisions need to come from a diverse team. Herman highlighted the desireneed for transparency in decision-making processes. Additionally, Angelique pointed out that interesting-practicetechno-centric solutions often fail, as evidenced by the Van Gogh museum example. Alice noted that the first step is always to ask, “What is needed?” Angelique suggested that opinionmatchmaking could be a starting point alongside addressing accessibility questions, emphasizing the importance of matching visitors with the right app or resources, as not everyone can be included in a one-size-fits-all approach. Futhermore, Genevra added that accessibilityaccess also involves sharing; for those without the means to travel, spaces can facilitate sharing through videos, descriptions, and other resources. Angelique questioned reflectionwhether people would be willing to pay for such accessand suggested different types of curatorship. She proposed a buddy system where people build bonds of trust and choose each other. Genevra stressed the importance of interesting-practicedesigning a format first, allowing modalities to develop from this framework through matchmaking. Teams could generate modalities and use the platform as a mediating tool. This approach could take various forms, such as encouraging users to put their phones away to engage more deeply.
from: Digital Space is... (report)

The discussion touched on the danger of concernsimply replicating existing solutions, such as just creating a livestream. The core issue is determining reflectionwho makes decisions within institutions regarding access and how to include the audience in these decisions. Designing the format is crucial, as it lays the foundation for diverse and effective modalities to emerge.
from: Digital Space is... (report)

Lea expressed confusion about the reflectionaudience targeted by DEN for the new platform, emphasizing the need to establish clear terminologies. The group wanted to understand DEN members’ views on digital culture by assigning them different roles and asking various questions. They aimed to uncover how DEN consumes digital culture, their screen time, the content they consume, the channels they use, and their perspective on the government’s role in creating new platforms.
from: Digital Space is... (report)

The audience was asked, “questionWhen did you think a digital tool made you feel more connected to the physical space?” Responses included Facebook events, music apps, and local WhatsApp groups. They also discussed reflectionwhether there should be maps showing local physical resources and if local ambassadors should report on smaller spaces, raising questions about who decides these roles. Lea suggested feedback mechanisms like “cultural queering the map,” while Florian emphasized that real-life experiences are interconnected and opinionfeedback should be immediate, unlike current funding plans.
from: Digital Space is... (report)

To design for groups that are typically left out, it’s crucial to inclusionfoster collaboration and ensure that participants do not feel lost in the process. While diverse modalities are common on websites, the goal here is desirenot to design the modalities themselves but to create a format that allows these modalities to emerge organically. This includes mechanisms like solutionmatchmaking and promoting long-term investment and engagement. By forming various teams, modalities can become desireopen-source formats that help multiple institutions rather than being owned by any single one. Multiple institutions could crowdfund a shared modality that benefits everyone, not tailored for specific institutions. This approach introduces inclusionalternative ways of navigating platforms for people with specific needs and ensures that these modalities continue to be tested and evolve based on user interaction, setting new standards for cultural institutions with more representation and participation. Designing these modalities would involve teams of artists, researchers, and organizations, with desireresearchers playing a key role in developing the modalities by leveraging their expertise to approach the problem from diverse perspectives. Institutions could inclusioncommission researchers to identify different needs and integrate them into the modalities. DEN might consider reflectionwhether these modalities can also serve as filters, depending on the audience and purpose, such as art performances connecting viewers differently than museum displays or passive live stream watching. Involving the audience as a fourth player in defining modalities, either through expert researchers or directly including users, can bring greater inclusivity and diversity into the process.
from: index (pad)

DEN is the Dutch driving force of digital transformation in the cultural sector. For some time, the organisation has been researching what is needed to enable the digital transition for all players in the field. In doing so, they also like to take input from artists, designers and programmers, preferably creators who regularly find themselves in digital spaces. Voices of Makers is a programme of four mapping sessions that MU Hybrid Art House and The Hmm are conducting in the coming months on behalf of DEN with the help of visual storyteller and mapping designer Rogier Klomp. During the four sessions, each with a specific theme, reflectionwe will invite makers to think with us about an interactive public space for hybrid culture and draw maps of what is needed.
from: Interactivity: the 7 scenarios of digital culture (report)

Rogier, Angelique, and Lilian presented scenarios representing diverse forms of digital platforms. Participants shared their opinions on these scenarios, discussing ways to improve and combine them for better functionality and inclusivity. Genevra marked her confusion because the scenarios seem to have different goals and audiences despite the connections between many scenarios, questioning whether reflectionmatchmaking is a desired feature. She pointed out a blindspot: the navigation and desire to navigate the platform vary depending on the user. She proposed considering a multi-matching model.
from: Interactivity: the 7 scenarios of digital culture (report)

When discussing this scenario, participants discussed that it might involve an reflectionunderlying system customizable by each institution, focusing more on concernproviding a service than fostering a community, which they believe is crucial. They also feared that a rigid code of conduct, tied to specific cultures, could lead to concernstatic rules that do not adapt well to diverse cultural contexts.
from: Interactivity: the 7 scenarios of digital culture (report)

Hay highlighted how reflectionlicenses and rules closely align with cultural codes, emphasizing the importance of understanding diverse cultural contexts. Karl proposed an intriguing alternative, suggesting a solutionfund where makers receive guidelines and trust to independently address questions, diverging from the current technology-centric approach. Lea raised concerns in this scenario regarding concernownership and the potential for individuals to become mere contributors to large entities, with machines doing the bulk of the work, prompting a deeper exploration into collaborative ownership models.
from: Interactivity: the 7 scenarios of digital culture (report)

Nadia, Sondi, and Martijn explore the boundaries of online meeting spaces, considering how to connect people across different geographies and link cultural and non-cultural spaces to initiatives and ideas. They aim to facilitate digital connections that go beyond local bubbles, addressing the need to desirereach wider audiencesrather than just friends of friends. This scenario envisions solutionindexing spaces available for makers, allowing them to step outside their familiar circles and discover new cultural hubs. To achieve this, they propose an indexing platform where people can easily find cultural resources and spaces, thus desiresharing dormant resources with minimal effort. This approach can accessibilityhelp institutions reach new audiences by connecting with small initiatives through digital means. Florian suggested that such a platform could serve as an interesting case study, given the disappearance of small grassroots initiatives in Dutch culture over the past 20 years. Meanwhile, Lilian emphasized the importance of questioning reflectionwhether these connections should remain purely digital or adopt a hybrid model. Additionally, Martijn noted that this scenario challenges organizations to challengereconsider their role within the cultural scene. Hay further highlighted the value of DIY efforts and the necessity ofdesireallowing space for trial and error, as the current emphasis on professionalism leaves little room for experimentation and failure. Building on this, Florian pointed out the challengedifficulty unknown makers face in finding venues to showcase their work due to the many layers within the cultural sector. In response, Angelique added that challengeinstitutions also struggle to present unknown makers. Finally, Sondi stressed the desireneed for connections that benefit not just the well-known makers but also those who are emerging or lesser-known. quoteThis scenario offers a simple methodology for opening up cultural spaces and connecting diverse initiatives through digital means, helping both institutions and makers broaden their reach and impact within the cultural landscape.
from: Interactivity: the 7 scenarios of digital culture (report)

Lilian emphasizes that as digital makers, they are inclined to experiment with various tools and technologies, having grown up as digital natives. quoteThey represent the "innovators" percentage, contrasting with DEN's majority perspective. TNO, in collaboration with DEN, has conducted previous research on digital transformation, interviewing institutions (such as MU) to highlight motivations such as inclusivity, diversity, and the facilitation of new cultural experiences. One participant raises a valid concern regarding the research potentially reflecting a concerndated mentality, akin to a mindset prevalent in the 90s. They draw attention to the reflectionassociation of technology in the cultural sector with the stereotype of the "IT guys", highlighting the need to address this issue with DEN. This association not only perpetuates gatekeeper culture but also underscores the inclusionimportance of challenging outdated perceptions and promoting inclusivity in digital spaces.