JiscMail Logo
Email discussion lists for the UK Education and Research communities

Help for NEW-MEDIA-CURATING Archives


NEW-MEDIA-CURATING Archives

NEW-MEDIA-CURATING Archives


NEW-MEDIA-CURATING@JISCMAIL.AC.UK


View:

Message:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Topic:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Author:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

Font:

Monospaced Font

LISTSERV Archives

LISTSERV Archives

NEW-MEDIA-CURATING Home

NEW-MEDIA-CURATING Home

NEW-MEDIA-CURATING  March 2011

NEW-MEDIA-CURATING March 2011

Options

Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Log In

Log In

Get Password

Get Password

Subject:

Re: ACE 'funding'

From:

Gary Thomas <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

Gary Thomas <[log in to unmask]>

Date:

Thu, 31 Mar 2011 16:19:00 +0100

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (237 lines)

I got a call from our ACE person yesterday morning at 8.35 - sort of asking how i was taking the news - and she offered to send our full assessment.

She's just sent this legal note..I think it's saying, you can ask for your own assessment report, but if you ask for it under FOI, we'll show it to anyone.

> It is our policy to make full assessment reports about an organisationís own application available to that organisation upon request. We have therefore not dealt with your request for a copy of your assessment report under the Freedom of Information Act 2000.
>
> If we treated your request for a copy of your assessment report as a Freedom of Information request, the information would then be available to all other people requesting the same information, even though it may contain confidential and potentially commercially sensitive information about your organisation. We would of course seek to withhold any information which appeared to be confidential or the disclosure of which could damage your commercial interests, but the exemptions available under the Freedom of Information Act are not absolute.
>
> In order for us to ensure that we are able to protect your confidential and commercially sensitive information, please do not disclose your assessment report to any third party. Should you make this information available to anyone else, it is likely that we will also be required to disclose the information should it be the subject of a request under the Freedom of Information Act.
>


On 31 Mar 2011, at 15:26, Bronac Ferran wrote:

> Sorry I do of course mean the Freedom of Information act!
>
> Mar 31, 2011 10:24:08 AM, [log in to unmask] wrote:
>
> ===========================================
>
> I'm numb and getting number..
>
> I can say without doubt that a reason for this happening will have been lack of advocacy within the arts funding structure for this/these specific area/s of practice.Without sustained advocacy carried out internally and also externally at multiple levels including in policy arena, press area and public domain any artform area/s will be disadvantaged. It is a lobbying war/jungle when it comes to arguing for reasons why certain things should be funded rather than others and unfortunately there has been a focus within ACE recently (as rightly identified in earlier emails) on 'digital marketing', on getting larger companies and venues to buy into 'digital' as ways of increasing audiences and on partnerships with mainstream broadcasters which carry low risk and are arguably not best use of arts subsidy.
>
> One thing that could be done is you could all ask to see the assessment reviews made last autumn and other reports by offices responsible for media arts clients - using the Data Protection Act and also ask to see internal reports recommending why they were cut.
>
> It is also an issue of scale - there was reference in the Observer last weekend to David Cameron's enthusiasm for Schumacher and his small is beautiful agenda....I felt in reading this that there was a high likelihood that in a few days time the small and dynamic organisations who led the development of media related practices in the past fifteen years would be on the cuts list. At the same time, this week ACE was savaged by a select committee in Parliament which criticised it heavily for various things including spending too much on itself, The Public being misjudged etc. It would be a wise time to build some kind of narrative that counterpoints and critiques what is happening there now (notwithstanding that it has retained some organisations in the portfolio that they can argue perhaps more easily into audience development scenarios with festivals and buildings clearly just about OK - at least on this occasion). It has taken Watershed decades of arguing, lobbying, demonstration, negotiation, rejection, counterrejection, sustained delivery, to make any kind of mark on relative levels of funding return.
> I go back to first point - lack of advocacy is at the heart of this....if there is something that people think can be done to now address this please count me in.
>
> Bronac
>
>
>
> Mar 31, 2011 09:43:20 AM, [log in to unmask] wrote:
>
> ===========================================
>
> Dear all,
>
> Like Marc, I have been reeling from the news of yesterday and conferring with
> colleagues about what has happened, and what we should do.
>
> Drew Hemment (director, FutureEverything), and I touched base yesterday, and
> Marc and I touched base this morning, and we feel we need to reach out to all
> the organisations hit so hard.
>
> It seems clear that nationally, the media arts / digital arts landscape has been
> completely ravaged with funding cuts to a wide range of significant
> organisations who have helped shape and define the field over many the years.
>
> onedotzero, folly, Proboscis, Lumen, Mute, Isis, Lovebytes, SCAN,
> Labculture/PVA, AccessSpace, Vivid, Picture This, and several others have lost
> funding, as far as we know. Several other organisations who have been very
> influential in the digital art space, including our friends, ArtSway in the New
> Forest, Quay Arts on the Isle of Wight, and Moti Roti in London, have also been
> cut. In addition, many other organisations who have been doing valuable work -
> including Animate Projects - were not funded.
>
> It seems to us that that half the digital visual arts organisations active in
> the UK have been cut.
>
> This is a massive shock and loss to us all.
>
> It is clear there will be more need than ever to form partnerships, and work
> collaboratively, and there will be huge pressure on those organisations who
> have emerged in one piece.
>
> We am not sure yet how precisely we deal with this, or whether we need to
> formalise our solidarity, but I think it is so important for us to collectively
> recognise that media and digital has been a serious loser in the past two days.
>
> We believe now is a time to stand up to be counted, and to extend the
> collaborative ethos and goodwill that already characterises our sector.
>
> Do people feel we could usefully swap notes on tangible ways we can better work
> together?
>
> Best wishes,
>
> Honor Harger
> Director, Lighthouse
>
>
>
> Quoting marc garrett :
>
>> Hi Sarah & all,
>>
>> I have been discussing the subject myself on other lists such as
>> netbehavour & to others privately through email...
>>
>> I am extremely angry.
>>
>> Yesterday was a significant day. A big shift politically, where the
>> ideology of an neo-liberalist agenda successfully disarmed half of the
>> media art orgnizations in the UK. Some excellent groups who were grass
>> roots, doing amazing stuff were attacked. I can't even bring myself to
>> mention their names at present, because it feels too raw. Already in the
>> UK, artist groups have been just about surviving on minimal amounts of
>> income. Yet due to generous dedication, enthusiasm and imaginative
>> approaches we have all witnessed an expansive and valuable contribution
>> to society, as well as towards the arts across the board. Our endeavors
>> collectively and separately have influenced many of the younger
>> generation to take on and consider the practice of media art in their
>> own practice. But also, (of course) it has been watered down by the less
>> critically engaged sectors of art culture also. This more reflects the
>> vulnerability of media arts (related) practice, in respect of its
>> presence and status in the art world and every day culture.
>>
>> There has been, and still are excellent digital and media art
>> organizations and groups receiving revenue in the UK from Arts Council
>> funding, actively changing things via their own, critical approaches.
>> Media art organizations across the board deserve more attention and
>> appreciation regarding its high output and intelligent production. By
>> closing over half of them down, cutting off the supply of revenue when
>> these organizations have been offering so much quality to our culture,
>> whilst receiving a reasonably modest sum is not only short sighted, but
>> serves in sending us all a message that there exists an active bias
>> towards more established and privileged sectors in the art world. Gone
>> are the days when art was supported because of its challenging contexts,
>> it is now more about what fits in via a top-down agenda, not the
>> criticalness of the art or culture itself, as a whole.
>>
>> As some may have noticed, our funding is at the lower end of the scale,
>> and obviously fails to reflect sufficiently the amount of hard work we
>> actually put into getting everything up and going. A seven day a week
>> job, with thousands of hours missing from our personal lives. We were
>> lucky to slip through and somehow remain funded. But, to be honest - it
>> does not feel that positive when looking around at what's left, as half
>> of our culture has been deleted in one day. I have always valued the
>> networked elements of having peer practitioners out there to share
>> ideas, as well as be challenged, informed and re-educated by them.
>>
>> The recent cuts are unethical and declare a shallow contempt towards
>> others who wish to explore more adventurous solutions creatively.
>> Already the established art world was content with propping up useless
>> and culturally vapid artists via unquestioning protocols and lazy
>> initiatives. It has aways been a difficult terrain to deal with when
>> having to re-educate those who were not willing to engage with media art
>> contexts, even though they ran galleries and art magazines and proposed
>> a (supposed) agenda towards new forms of art practice, hypocritically.
>> It is not only the Government and its neo-liberal onslaught on anything
>> of human value and worth, that has helped in hurting our once dynamic
>> and thriving culture - it was the systemic ignorance of a hermetically
>> sealed art world also.
>>
>> marc.
>>
>> wishing you well.
>>> Hi all
>>> Yes a letter to journalists as soon as possible is the way to go, can we
>> collectively draft it here? With some international input too please from
>> those of you on this list who have been followers and supporters of new media
>> art in England... It would also be good to have some voices from the new
>> media art orgs that were successful, such as furtherfield and lighthouse
>> perhaps, who could comment on what the loss of their extended networks means
>> for their work? Mike, what does it mean for AND fest that one of the three
>> orgs behind it was cut; rebecca what does it mean for AV fest that partners
>> in the city such as Amino or Isis were not successful?
>>> Does anyone have any names of journalists we could contact? it is hard not
>> to see it as massive de investment in a little understood or appreciated
>> artform.
>>> Hurried thoughts from London... If any non British based readers on this
>> list have thoughts or need an explanation, do speak up!
>>> Sarah
>>>
>>> On 31 Mar 2011, at 11:08, Gary Thomas wrote:
>>>
>>>> Ditto what Taylor, Mat and Mike said..
>>>>
>>>> And I think Ele's suggestion of a letter to The Guardian would do no harm.
>>>>
>>>> (It was only after the guardian's cutsblog mentioned that our gfta had
>> been rejected that ace called us to encourage us to resubmit)
>>>>
>>>> This isn't just about cuts - it's about a lack of balance in their friggin
>> portfolio!
>>>>
>>>> gt
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> Begin forwarded message:
>>>>>
>>>>>> From: Ele Carpenter
>>>>>> Date: 30 March 2011 21:50:33 GMT+01:00
>>>>>> To: [log in to unmask]
>>>>>> Subject: Re: [NEW-MEDIA-CURATING] ACE funding
>>>>>> Reply-To: Ele Carpenter
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Here is the list of organisations to be cut on Guardian blog:
>>>>>>
>>
> http://www.guardian.co.uk/news/datablog/2011/mar/30/arts-council-cuts-list-funding
>>>>>>
>>>>>> It's such a long list it's hard to comprehend - and as Clive says the
>>>>>> media arts seem very hard hit within the percentage of visual arts
>>>>>> cuts. I'm sure there's someone on this list who can download the
>>>>>> Guardian data and do the maths?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Whilst everyone is reeling in shock, could we draft a letter to the
>>>>>> Guardian? At don't think it's gonna make a difference - but visibility
>>>>>> seems important. Maybe there'll be a Media Arts Block with the
>>>>>> http://artsagainstcuts.wordpress.com protests now.... ?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Any ideas?
>>>>>> Ele
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 30 March 2011 20:45, Clive Gillman wrote:
>>>>>>> Don't want to start a new line, but it feels like some comment is
>> needed on
>>>>>>> the complete wipeout of ACE-funded organisations working with new media
>>>>>>> announced today - folly, PVA, Mute, Access Space, Lovebytes, Proboscis,
>>>>>>> Vivid. Been out of the loop in England, but is that it for Arts Council
>>>>>>> England support for new media ?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> Ele Carpenter
>>>>>> Curator
>>>>>> Lecturer, MFA Curating, Dept of Art, Goldsmiths College, Uni of London.
>>>>>> m: +44 (0)7989 502 191
>>>>>> www.elecarpenter.org.uk
>>>>>> www.eleweekend.blogspot.com
>>
>
>
> . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
> honor harger
> email: [log in to unmask]
> r a d i o q u a l i a:
> http://www.radioqualia.net

Top of Message | Previous Page | Permalink

JiscMail Tools


RSS Feeds and Sharing


Advanced Options


Archives

November 2019
October 2019
September 2019
August 2019
July 2019
June 2019
May 2019
April 2019
March 2019
February 2019
January 2019
December 2018
November 2018
October 2018
September 2018
August 2018
July 2018
June 2018
May 2018
April 2018
March 2018
February 2018
January 2018
December 2017
November 2017
October 2017
September 2017
August 2017
July 2017
June 2017
May 2017
April 2017
March 2017
February 2017
January 2017
December 2016
November 2016
October 2016
September 2016
August 2016
July 2016
June 2016
May 2016
April 2016
March 2016
February 2016
January 2016
December 2015
November 2015
October 2015
September 2015
August 2015
July 2015
June 2015
May 2015
April 2015
March 2015
February 2015
January 2015
December 2014
November 2014
October 2014
September 2014
August 2014
July 2014
June 2014
May 2014
April 2014
March 2014
February 2014
January 2014
December 2013
November 2013
October 2013
September 2013
August 2013
July 2013
June 2013
May 2013
April 2013
March 2013
February 2013
January 2013
December 2012
November 2012
October 2012
September 2012
August 2012
July 2012
June 2012
May 2012
April 2012
March 2012
February 2012
January 2012
December 2011
November 2011
October 2011
September 2011
August 2011
July 2011
June 2011
May 2011
April 2011
March 2011
February 2011
January 2011
December 2010
November 2010
October 2010
September 2010
August 2010
July 2010
June 2010
May 2010
April 2010
March 2010
February 2010
January 2010
December 2009
November 2009
October 2009
September 2009
August 2009
July 2009
June 2009
May 2009
April 2009
March 2009
February 2009
January 2009
December 2008
November 2008
October 2008
September 2008
August 2008
July 2008
June 2008
May 2008
April 2008
March 2008
February 2008
January 2008
December 2007
November 2007
October 2007
September 2007
August 2007
July 2007
June 2007
May 2007
April 2007
March 2007
February 2007
January 2007
2006
2005
2004
2003
2002
2001


JiscMail is a Jisc service.

View our service policies at https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/policyandsecurity/ and Jisc's privacy policy at https://www.jisc.ac.uk/website/privacy-notice

Secured by F-Secure Anti-Virus CataList Email List Search Powered by the LISTSERV Email List Manager