Jump to content
This Site Uses Cookies. If You Want to Disable Cookies, Please See Your Browser Documentation. ×

Building New Ballet Audiences


Recommended Posts

Yes, It IS Possible to Build New Ballet Audiences in 2017
http://www.dancemagazine.com/yes-it-is-possible-to-build-new-ballet-audiences-in-2017-2476154769.html

'One way to do this is by replacing dance terms that mean nothing to the average person, like "mixed rep" or "triple bill," with words that are more universally understood, like "three one-act ballets."'
-- Hmmm, if that's where the real problem lies, I have to think we're really bad off as a culture. But hey, whatever!

"Ballet Austin films a professional trailer for each ballet and projects it in the theater lobby, so that their audience can preview coming attractions."
— an excellent idea, and doesn't have to be that expensive to produce

Edited by pherank
Link to comment
12 hours ago, sandik said:

It took a while for some companies to get their minds around social media, but many of them are doing some excellent work.

I see thousands  of views/hearts on instagram pictures. Many dancers have numerous followers. I wonder how much this translates into ticket sales. I'm sure research is being done in that area.

Link to comment
On 8/26/2017 at 11:05 PM, vipa said:

I see thousands  of views/hearts on instagram pictures. Many dancers have numerous followers. I wonder how much this translates into ticket sales. I'm sure research is being done in that area.

 

I wouldn't count on any research being done.  ;)

It's not all that easy to even relate Instagram followers (plus the people who regularly visit certain Instagram pages, but aren't "followers") to something like ticket subscriptions. It can be a way to create some amount of "buzz" around an event, but converting to actual ticket sales is another matter.

 

What is doable: if a ballet company places a link on their Instagram/Facebook pages that advertises a special ticket offer, then it is possible to measure the link clicks VS the number of actual online ticket purchases on the landing page.

 

Dancers will often mention a gala they are participating in - but they do so as it is happening (which makes it hard to drive ticket sales). It's pretty rare for a dancer to use their Facebook/Instagram page as a true marketing tool, since for most of them it is mainly a personal page, and not strictly for informing the public about their performances. But I generally see a mishmash of both kinds of information.

Link to comment
11 hours ago, pherank said:

 

I wouldn't count on any research being done.  ;)

It's not all that easy to even relate Instagram followers (plus the people who regularly visit certain Instagram pages, but aren't "followers") to something like ticket subscriptions. It can be a way to create some amount of "buzz" around an event, but converting to actual ticket sales is another matter.

 

What is doable: if a ballet company places a link on their Instagram/Facebook pages that advertises a special ticket offer, then it is possible to measure the link clicks VS the number of actual online ticket purchases on the landing page.

 

Dancers will often mention a gala they are participating in - but they do so as it is happening (which makes it hard to drive ticket sales). It's pretty rare for a dancer to use their Facebook/Instagram page as a true marketing tool, since for most of them it is mainly a personal page, and not strictly for informing the public about their performances. But I generally see a mishmash of both kinds of information.

 

The truth is likely somewhere in between.  I know that ticketing, both online and in person, tries to survey their customers (where did you hear about this show?) -- participation in this kind of research is spotty, but it does have some traction.  Traceable discounts (promotional codes) are more reliable, since they're part of a specific program. 

 

But the fact is that promotion is a more subtle process than we might think.  While the most obvious kinds of connection are the easiest to track ("I saw the ad in the paper and bought a ticket") a significant part of the process is just raising the profile of the organization as a whole.  While you may not fulfill the "saw the ad = bought the ticket" equation, you may have seen a bus going by with an ad on the side.  And then in a couple of months you overhear someone in line at the grocery talking about their granddaughter's recital, which reminds you of the bus, and when your partner says "we never go anywhere anymore" you say, "hey, how about a ballet performance?"

 

I have a feeling that social media is much more powerful in that realm than in direct ticket sales.  In general, the social media I've seen encourages people to tell others about their choices -- I ate here, I visited there, I saw this...  As we fill in the details on our own online identity, we see the same thing happening with other people, and we add their choices to the stew of possibilities we see for ourselves.

 

 

Edited by sandik
Link to comment
12 hours ago, pherank said:

It's not all that easy to even relate Instagram followers (plus the people who regularly visit certain Instagram pages, but aren't "followers") to something like ticket subscriptions. It can be a way to create some amount of "buzz" around an event, but converting to actual ticket sales is another matter.

 

Facebook and its subsidiary Instagram have a robust array of tools for marketers that would allow a ballet company to make a pretty direct link between ad views and subsequent ticket purchases, e.g., the Facebook Pixel and Offline Conversions API. Now, this applies to the company's own Facebook page and ads, but I would be shocked if Facebook, via its ubiquitous and exquisitely fine-tuned tracking tools, couldn't link someone who, say, liked Sara Mearns' Instagram feed to someone who bought a ticket to NYCB. That's how they make their money: they sell ads based on their ability to serve them to exactly the right people; and to know who those people are, Facebook tracks everything they touch online and off. (To be clear: Facebook uses this info itself; I don't believe it makes the individual profiles it compiles available to third parties.)  If NYCB or ABT or any other company decided it wanted to advertise on Facebook or Instagram (and they may well do so already), those ads would end up in the feed of likely prospects. If Facebook wanted to tell NYCB how many Sara Mearns followers also bought an NYCB ticket, it could probably do so within a reasonable margin of error.

 

Facebook also offers any number of tools to monitor engagement. If a company doesn't know the age, gender, and location of the people viewing its page or what content gets the best response or what people do after they see it, its not because Facebook isn't telling them. 

 

This Washington Post article identifies the "98 personal data points that Facebook uses to target ads to you." It's pretty startling. 

 

If I were a ballet company, I'd be creating as much shareable social media content as my budget would allow. 

 

Link to comment

"If Facebook wanted to tell NYCB how many Sara Mearns followers also bought an NYCB ticket, it could probably do so within a reasonable margin of error"

— That's what companies would like to know, but I'm going to argue that it would require an NSA-level of intrusiveness to actually determine the effectiveness of the 3rd party (dancer's) Instagram postings. And, that is one reason why ballet companies still rely upon "user satisfaction" and feedback surveys to find out who actually did what, when and why. And plenty of people don't want to fill those out online, or in the mail, or don't supply their email addresses and only purchase tickets from the ticket box, etc.

"Facebook and its subsidiary Instagram have a robust array of tools for marketers that would allow a ballet company to make a pretty direct link between ad views and subsequent ticket purchases"

— Dancer's social media postings are not the same kind of information though. The only sure fire way to do this is to track clicks on promotion hyperlinks that link directly to online ticket forms. And it is possible to track whether the same IP address arrived at the ticket form and submitted it, or whether they didn't actually go through with the transaction.

There are so many variables in all of this. When Dancer Z posts, "Arriving in Mexico today" and an Instagram follower comments, "OMG! I didn't know you were performing here! I want to go." What is a software analysis program to make of these conversations? I would estimate that at least 95% of the postings and comments never rise above this level of specificity/vagueness. Now, ballet companies and gala committees may start pressuring their dancers to write posts that are more effective at guiding people to online ticket purchases forms, but I can imagine the dancers will mostly balk at being part of the sales and marketing machinery of ballet organizations. They are looking for a space to talk about general feelings and impressions about absolutely anything (including politics, btw).

Link to comment
39 minutes ago, pherank said:

"If Facebook wanted to tell NYCB how many Sara Mearns followers also bought an NYCB ticket, it could probably do so within a reasonable margin of error"

— That's what companies would like to know, but I'm going to argue that it would require an NSA-level of intrusiveness to actually determine the effectiveness of the 3rd party (dancer's) Instagram postings. And, that is one reason why ballet companies still rely upon "user satisfaction" and feedback surveys to find out who actually did what, when and why. And plenty of people don't want to fill those out online, or in the mail, or don't supply their email addresses and only purchase tickets from the ticket box, etc.

"Facebook and its subsidiary Instagram have a robust array of tools for marketers that would allow a ballet company to make a pretty direct link between ad views and subsequent ticket purchases"

— Dancer's social media postings are not the same kind of information though. The only sure fire way to do this is to track clicks on promotion hyperlinks that link directly to online ticket forms. And it is possible to track whether the same IP address arrived at the ticket form and submitted it, or whether they didn't actually go through with the transaction.

There are so many variables in all of this. When Dancer Z posts, "Arriving in Mexico today" and an Instagram follower comments, "OMG! I didn't know you were performing here! I want to go." What is a software analysis program to make of these conversations? I would estimate that at least 95% of the postings and comments never rise above this level of specificity/vagueness. Now, ballet companies and gala committees may start pressuring their dancers to write posts that are more effective at guiding people to online ticket purchases forms, but I can imagine the dancers will mostly balk at being part of the sales and marketing machinery of ballet organizations. They are looking for a space to talk about general feelings and impressions about absolutely anything (including politics, btw).

 

Yes to point one; that is why I said Facebook doesn't (to the best of my knowledge) supply non-anonymized user profile data to its customers. That it could do so, I have no doubt.

 

Re point two: I thought I was careful to draw a distinction between a company's official pages and ads and its dancers' personal social media postings. I guess not. 

 

I absolutely agree that companies should not require their dancers post promotional content in their personal accounts. That being said, Facebook and Instagram would no doubt serve a dance company ad to a user who was actively following one of the company's dancers, liked one of their posts, or shared it with their network. A personal account can be leveraged for promotion simply by giving Facebook or Instagram useful ad-targeting information. And of course dance companies can themselves share a dancer's personal content as a means of increasing reach. 

Link to comment

The easy way dancer's have of helping out the companies is through the use of the ubiquitous hashtags (for Instagram). That way some of the dancer's followers will click on the hashtag and reach a true advertising and sales webpage (the hashtag and webpage would have to be set up in advance by the company). I imagine it isn't too difficult to use hashtags correctly and conscientiously in posts(!), but not everyone will want to play.

 

This discussion naturally leads me to think about the postings on this website, and whether there is actually any conversion to ticket sales, or if it's all just preaching to the choir.  ;)

Has anyone read a discussion on Ballet Alert that induced them to go to a show that they otherwise would not have known about, or cared to purchase a ticket for?

 

 

Link to comment
1 hour ago, pherank said:


"Facebook and its subsidiary Instagram have a robust array of tools for marketers that would allow a ballet company to make a pretty direct link between ad views and subsequent ticket purchases"

— Dancer's social media postings are not the same kind of information though. The only sure fire way to do this is to track clicks on promotion hyperlinks that link directly to online ticket forms. And it is possible to track whether the same IP address arrived at the ticket form and submitted it, or whether they didn't actually go through with the transaction.
 

 

OK, I just took a deep dive into Facebook's advertising support pages. I too thought that ad conversion tracking required a user to actually click on an ad, but no: Facebook will also track and attribute a conversion based on ad impressions - i.e., a user simply viewing an ad.

 

From the "How does Facebook attribute actions to my ads?" page:

 

"Facebook credits (or attributes) actions to your ad if someone viewed or clicked your ad and then took an action within a specified time period."

 

"We report actions based on impressions (views) of your ad and clicks on your ad:

Clicks: A person clicked your ad and took an action. This is called click-through attribution.

Impressions: A person saw your ad, didn't click it, but took an action within the attribution window. This is called view-through attribution."

 

"Facebook credits an action to your ad if someone viewed or clicked your ad and then took a desired action (ex: purchased a product on a website) within a specified number of days. The number of days between when a person viewed or clicked your ad and then subsequently took an action is called an attribution window."

 

Provided the company has enabled (and paid for) the right kind of tracking, Facebook will flag the purchase (and claim a conversion) even if the user only viewed the ad - no need to click through!

Edited by Kathleen O'Connell
Link to comment
46 minutes ago, Kathleen O'Connell said:

 

Absolutely!

 

That's one!  ;)

 

The great mystery I think is what is happening with the people who occasionally wander through this forum and read some of various threads, but never leave comments themselves (presumably people who never created an account) - do they purchase tickets to performances based on what they have read?

Link to comment
5 hours ago, Kathleen O'Connell said:

 

OK, I just took a deep dive into Facebook's advertising support pages. I too thought that ad conversion tracking required a user to actually click on an ad, but no: Facebook will also track and attribute a conversion based on ad impressions - i.e., a user simply viewing an ad.

 

....

 

Provided the company has enabled (and paid for) the right kind of tracking, Facebook will flag the purchase (and claim a conversion) even if the user only viewed the ad - no need to click through!

 

Thank you for this -- I had to read it a couple of times to get the full flavor, since I'm not a very social media girl, but it's fascinating stuff.

Link to comment
21 hours ago, Kathleen O'Connell said:

"Facebook credits (or attributes) actions to your ad if someone viewed or clicked your ad and then took an action within a specified time period."

 

One problem is that "viewing" an ad is not a guarantee that the ad was read (at all) and cognitively understood by the reader. Was the ad influential, or just annoying?

For companies that have their own websites that are capable of e-commerce transactions (ordering tickets online), it's easy to track the number of users coming from a specific Facebook page and landing on a  ticket purchase form page of the company website, and filling out and submitting that form. It's the reverse situation that isn't really doable - Facebook can't know for certain what happens when a user clicks on a Facebook ad and then leaves their site. If that makes sense.

 

What has long been frustrating for marketing departments is that the statistics coming from websites/Facebook/Instagram, etc. are recordings of mechanical/electronic events only. Determining why a user took a particular action is harder to suss out. I'm sure many people have run into a situation in which they purchased an item on a website and then were asked to fill out a "quick survey" about their experience. The survey represents information that marketing would presumably love to know about, but often the surveys ask the user questions that may seem irrelevant, or oddly focused - marketing doesn't always know the right questions to ask a a particular group. The questions we ask often betrays are own interests and not those of the person being questioned.

Link to comment
7 minutes ago, pherank said:

 

It's the reverse situation that isn't really doable - Facebook can't know for certain what happens when a user clicks on a Facebook ad and then leaves their site. If that makes sense.

 

 

By "their site" do you mean Facebook's?

 

I'm under the impression that Facebook's user identification and tracking tools allow it to follow users all over the web. When one logs onto Facebook, it creates a "signature" that combines one's Facebook ID, browser, IP address, and device and stores that signature on its servers. It will even build up a dossier of all of the IP addresses and devices via which users accesses their Facebook accounts so they can be tracked from all their devices, browsers, and IP addresses. Whenever that user visits a webpage with a Facebook tracking pixel or some other Facebook tracking tool on it, the tracker sends the data back to Facebook. Doesn't this generate a pretty comprehensive map of where that user has been and what they did there? 

 

If I log on to Facebook, click on (or even just view) an ad, then leave Facebook to wander around the web and eventually land on the advertiser's site, unless I'm using a tracking blocker (such as Ghostery, eg) , Facebook is going to know. It's also going to know what I did when I got there - including not doing anything.

 

Am I missing something?

 

 

Link to comment
8 hours ago, Kathleen O'Connell said:

 

By "their site" do you mean Facebook's?

 

I'm under the impression that Facebook's user identification and tracking tools allow it to follow users all over the web. When one logs onto Facebook, it creates a "signature" that combines one's Facebook ID, browser, IP address, and device and stores that signature on its servers. It will even build up a dossier of all of the IP addresses and devices via which users accesses their Facebook accounts so they can be tracked from all their devices, browsers, and IP addresses. Whenever that user visits a webpage with a Facebook tracking pixel or some other Facebook tracking tool on it, the tracker sends the data back to Facebook. Doesn't this generate a pretty comprehensive map of where that user has been and what they did there? 

 

If I log on to Facebook, click on (or even just view) an ad, then leave Facebook to wander around the web and eventually land on the advertiser's site, unless I'm using a tracking blocker (such as Ghostery, eg) , Facebook is going to know. It's also going to know what I did when I got there - including not doing anything.

 

Am I missing something?

 

 

 

"By 'their site' do you mean Facebook's?"
Yes.

"Doesn't this generate a pretty comprehensive map of where that user has been and what they did there?"

Yes, and no, like everything else.  ;)

If you are a Facebook registered user - and only then - Facebook keeps track of everything that you "LIKE" on 3rd party web pages (because that requires using Facebook applications and Facebook owns all the LIKE buttons distributed around the Internet). And if there is advertising on that 3rd party web page you are visiting that relates to Facebook, you get more tracking cookies deposited on your computer. Essentially, if you allow Facebook to deposit cookies on your computer, you will be tracked across many websites (unless those websites are not part of the Facebook universe). The actual information that they are gathering is limited to certain items though (and somewhere in their policy that is specified). I'm not about to say that Facebook isn't intrusive - personally, I made the decision to not play their game anymore, and Google is a similar matter. The important thing is that Facebook can only really track your online behavior when you are going to websites that support Facebook ads and LIKE buttons, and yes, that is a lot of commonly used websites. And it is always possible to remove the cookies from your computer (and you should do so routinely).

 

Facebook - and any other company - can track activity on any of their own servers. And there are many webmaster tools that can be employed to do that (not just Facebook-created software tools). But, no, they cannot follow your IP around the Internet, unless they are using completely intrusive methods (for example, "Trojan Horse" -type of software that is literally deposited secretly on your computer, and is a software program). Facebook is still dependent on you landing on Facebook-connected pages. And if you're not a Facebook user, you disallow cookies from Facebook, and you use a Virtual Private Network (VPN) to connect to the Web (which disguises your real IP address) then they are very limited as to what they can get from your browser when you land on a Facebook page. [I always recommend using a program like "CCleaner" to delete your cached browser files (HTML pages, images, cookies, browser history, etc.) after every time you finish browsing the Web. This can help to get rid of malware before it activates itself on your computer.]

 

Cookies (small bits of text) and "tracking pixels" work in conjunction with the creator's web pages. So, in the case of Facebook, they leave a browser cookie on your computer (in one of the browser's software directories - unless you have disallowed this functionality in the software preferences) that is "found" the next time you land on a Facebook page (and that page has code to read what was written to your Facebook cookie). The Facebook code knows where to look on your computer for their cookies (it's a previously assigned location that depends upon the operating system you use, and such).

Note: Tracking pixels allow websites to track how many times a webpage has been viewed (visits), or how many time an email was opened (opens).
The tracking pixel was/is a little piece of HTML code containing an 1 x 1 pixel transparent image that is inserted in the web pages of a website or in the email you send, but this effect can now also be created with JavaScript. The web server software keeps track of the number of times these images were accessed (the web page was viewed). Yes, the web server is already keeping track of web page access, but advertisers don't have access to Facebook's server logs, so using tracking pixels is one easy way to track visits to an ad page (used in conjunction with an ad tracking system).

Sorry if this sounds like babble - this stuff gets to be pretty complicated so I'm just giving you a basic explanation.

You can read this article regarding a lawsuit with Facebook - the title turns out, naturally, to be misleading:
Facebook Can Track Your Internet Activity After You Log Out, Says Judge
http://fortune.com/2017/07/03/facebook-tracking-privacy-lawsuit/


 

 

Edited by pherank
Link to comment
8 hours ago, pherank said:


Sorry if this sounds like babble - this stuff gets to be pretty complicated so I'm just giving you a basic explanation.
 

 

 

No worries - I'm an old who codes. :wink:

 

The cookies and cashes are flushed regularly; all the back-ups are encrypted; the trackers are blocked; the passwords are managed; the hard drive is cloned regularly; and a VPN invoked when appropriate. And still, I'm vulnerable. 

 

I'm a board member and the volunteer administrator of a small performing arts non-profit. We use MailChimp to distribute our concert announcements; we don't even turn on all the tracking that we could, and we know a surprising amount about what happens when someone receives one of our emails. 

 

Oh, yeah - no Facebook.

Edited by Kathleen O'Connell
Link to comment
6 hours ago, Kathleen O'Connell said:

 

No worries - I'm an old who codes. :wink:

 

The cookies and cashes are flushed regularly; all the back-ups are encrypted; the trackers are blocked; the passwords are managed; the hard drive is cloned regularly; and a VPN invoked when appropriate. And still, I'm vulnerable. 

 

I'm a board member and the volunteer administrator of a small performing arts non-profit. We use MailChimp to distribute our concert announcements; we don't even turn on all the tracking that we could, and we know a surprising amount about what happens when someone receives one of our emails. 

 

Oh, yeah - no Facebook.

 

Ah, then you've already been initiated into the 'wonders' of the Web.  ;)

Best of luck to us all! You've probably noticed that services like Google are not supportive of VPN use, and a browser like Safari is really cumbersome to use if one is using maximum privacy settings. For an easy time browsing, you've got to play along with the big web companies.

 

You probably are aware that companies like Facebook and Google are working hard to deliver the next generation of trackers, which will be even harder to deal with. And tracking for mobile devices isn't the same as what works for desktop computers. Unfortunately, I think we are fast approaching a time when "surfing" the Internet will simply consist of a login to the Amazon/Facebook/Google/Apple system, and the environment will be completely controlled by them. Much like the old days when viewers decided between ABC, CBS, and NBC TV channels. I doubt there will be more options - there will be fewer.

Link to comment

Back to discussing dinosaur-style media: television. Not so long ago, today's "boomers" were initiated on the wonders of classical performing arts via television, usually at the gentle suggestion of their mothers or other relative in the house. "TV time" often involved sitting in front of the tube, on a big sofa. "It's Leonard Bernstein"...or "time for Ed Sullivan, today with Topo Gigio and Villella/McBride." Later, it was PBS "Dance in America" during its golden years.  It worked for many of us boomers without access to live arts. We're now part of the remaining core audience in our 60s and 70s. My point: the impetus for sitting down and watching (truly watching and absorbing) the arts used to come from an at-home family member. Those family members (parents, grandparents) aren't necessarily there in 2017 to carefully guide & school the kids in the fine arts/classical culture.

 

How can a similar "guided home experience" happen in 2017 between parents/guardians and kids in the age of internet? Does anybody have time? Does anybody care other than hard-core arts lovers on sites like Ballet Alert? Trying to be optimistic here. 

Link to comment
1 hour ago, CharlieH said:

How can a similar "guided home experience" happen in 2017 between parents/guardians and kids in the age of internet? Does anybody have time? Does anybody care other than hard-core arts lovers on sites like Ballet Alert? Trying to be optimistic here. 

 

Unless one has a vested interest in the arts (for work or hobby) then it isn't likely that the details of children's exposure to the arts is going to be of interest. That's life. Unfortunately, in the U.S. at least, it's not likely that schools can be relied upon to give children a decent exposure to arts such as dance, or drawing/painting. Music, poetry/fiction and drama exposure is hit-and-miss depending upon the school and its special programs (if they haven't been cancelled at his point).

Link to comment

A parent, or grandparent, or aunt, or uncle, or any adult who wanted to introduce a child to the performing arts has a wealth of tools with which to do so, none of which were available to my parents:

 

1) Buy some DVDs.

2) Borrow some DVDs from the library.

3) Stream something from YouTube or Vimeo or an arts' organizations own streaming service on any device with a screen, including a TV (either a smart TV or a not-so-smart one hooked up to a Roku box, or a Firestick, or a Chromecast device). 

4) Attend a live HD broadcast in a movie theater, or, depending on the municipality, at a local library or school auditorium.

 

All it takes is wanting to do it.

Link to comment
3 hours ago, Kathleen O'Connell said:

3) Stream something from YouTube or Vimeo or an arts' organizations own streaming service on any device with a screen, including a TV (either a smart TV or a not-so-smart one hooked up to a Roku box, or a Firestick, or a Chromecast device). 

 

Or, in my case, a somewhat creaky laptop.

 

My mother is my niece's full-time babysitter. You can bet grandma relies on a lot of YouTube and has a handy stack of DVDs standing by. My niece watched her first ballet courtesy of YouTube at two: Giselle (except where the music got scary.) She promptly changed her outfit herself and recreated Giselle's first-act variation. (This was filmed on grandma's tablet. It's priceless.) My now four-year-old niece has already informed her parents that when she get a little older, she plans to take ballet lessons, and while she tells them that she can't stand on her toes yet, because it hurts and she hasn't got the right shoes, in a few years she'll do that, too, she declares. 

 

Incidentally, my mother is a painter and a musician, not a dancer, but it's still a bit soon for opera.

Link to comment
16 hours ago, pherank said:

 

Unless one has a vested interest in the arts (for work or hobby) then it isn't likely that the details of children's exposure to the arts is going to be of interest. That's life. Unfortunately, in the U.S. at least, it's not likely that schools can be relied upon to give children a decent exposure to arts such as dance, or drawing/painting. Music, poetry/fiction and drama exposure is hit-and-miss depending upon the school and its special programs (if they haven't been cancelled at his point).

 

True. Back in the '60s, though, watching a quality TV event w/ family was just a normal thing that a middle-class family did, even if they did not have a particular passion for the arts.  It was done just as kids and parents circled around the TV to hear a Presidential Oval Office address in the old days...or rallying 'round the radio for FDR's fireside chats. I believe that parent's general interest in wishing to uplift the family and the availability of time has changed.  Also, there weren't so many entertainment choices then as there are now. Yes, we now have DVDs to borrow or buy or look-up on YouTube (not the same thing as watching on a big screen in the company of family and discussing later) but does the average middle-class parent give a hoot? Do families now make time to "rally 'round the laptop" and make the viewing of an event (arts, presidential Oval Office speech, live sports match). No - every kid, adult and even the pet of the household has his/her own device. It's hard to inculcate values, including love of classical arts, when we're all doing our own thing. It's a real challenge for arts institutions.

Edited by CharlieH
Link to comment

Connect that laptop to the big-screen TV and stereo system, and you can sit down the entire family to watch a stream and discuss it afterwards. There is some evidence that this happens, although not, perhaps, in the format that you describe. The Vienna State Opera streams about 50 performances a season. But at €14 a pop, it isn't cheap. In an interview a couple of years ago the project's director mentioned the existence of VSO viewing parties, where friends gather at one home, arrange a potluck dinner and watch a performance together to lessen the expense each person has to bear.

 

I'll admit that where streams are concerned, the pickings for dance, and ballet in particular, are pretty slim. But there are fabulous classical music channels out there, and I wouldn't dream of watching the concerts on a computer screen with tinny sound. But when the performances are redirected through the TV screen and stereo, the experience is extremely satisfying and, yes, communal. Dutch radio has an amazing classical music channel. A number of orchestras load complete works/performances onto YouTube, including the Frankfurt Radio Symphony Orchestra, Warsaw Philharmonic and Flanders Symphony Orchestra. Arte Concert is a vast video resource, though there can be geo-blocks. Culturebox has a YouTube channel in addition to its main site, though there are geoblocks there, too, and classical art is in the minority. EuroArts posts a ton of things on YouTube, though I understand that most of the substantial stuff is blocked in the United States, unforunately. And of course there's Opera Platform and Medici.tv, which requires registering and logging-in. In other words, it would be possible to spend the entire day watching nothing but classical music on a connected TV. (The downside? I will admit that in the last couple of years my attendance at local classical music concerts has fallen, which has as much to do with my dissatisfaction with the local orchestra's repertoire choices and resident conductor, as it does with the accessibility of free classical music streams.)

Edited by volcanohunter
Link to comment
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...