NESTA ACE AHRC Digital R&D Fund

[Gary Thomas]

http://www.nesta.org.uk/areas_of_work/creative_economy/digitial_rnd/assets/features/digital_rd_programme_definitions

It's specifically for "digital projects which seek to expand audience reach and engagement and/or to develop new business models"  And this seems a strange way of putting something in its place..: "Projects involving innovation in art form innovation are in scope insofar as they meet the programme's audience reach/engagement and/or business model objectives."

Also in these guidelines, ACE is explicit that it supports "digital art".  Which seems an arbitrary and meaningless term for them to use. I'm sure they know what they mean by it, though it always makes me think of fractals.

'Crowd sourcing scoping' seems a grand way of describing what they did with google...  http://www.nesta.org.uk/areas_of_work/creative_economy/digitial_rnd/assets/features/digital_rd_programme_scoping_exercise

[Simon Biggs]

Well, there is far more to digital art than fractals, just as there is more
to video art than watching paint dry, and we all know that. I am sure ACE
knows it too.

But this NESTA/ACE initiative is not about digital art (or art, per se).
This is NESTA territory, seeking to support SME's in their industrial
sector. Crowd-sourcing, co-creation and co-design are popular themes (I am a
PI on a £1.2 million SFC funded project looking at the interaction of social
media with creative media in the Scottish context - Moving Targets). But
this is not ACE territory and they shouldn't be spending money destined for
supporting the arts on this sort of activity. This is about industry, not
art. Can somebody please tell them that.

I would have expected ACE to have been very protective of its funds,
especially at a time like this, and focusing its support on core activities
- the creative arts. Obviously they haven't read their mission statement
lately.

Best

Simon

On 07/06/2011 16:45, "Gary Thomas" <gary....@mac.com> wrote:

>
> http://www.nesta.org.uk/areas_of_work/creative_economy/digitial_rnd/assets/fea

Simon Biggs
si...@littlepig.org.uk
http://www.littlepig.org.uk/

s.b...@eca.ac.uk
http://www.elmcip.net/
http://www.eca.ac.uk/circle/

[Simon Worthington]

Hi,

I think the MTM report plays out what Simon Biggs identifies below, in
that the ACE/NESTA focus is on industry areas and these don't need ACE
funding directed towards them as these industries are already peddling
hard to develop and make the services identified easily available. In
addition the funds ACE are allocating are small in comparison to the VC
money being pumped into these industry areas.

http://www.nesta.org.uk/library/documents/NESTADigitalRnDProgrammeJune201V2.pdf.pdf

Mobile and location
Digital distribution
Play and gaming
UGC and social media
Openness and open data
Education and learning

Maybe we need a new cultural list of priorities ;-)

Simon Worthington

--
Beyond the stars - @mrchristian99

[Gary Thomas]

oh come on simon..you know I wasn't deriding 'digital art' as we know it..

And I'm not sure ACE does know it the way(s) we do.

Try google images for 'digital art', but not if you've just eaten.

[DanceDigital]

I can see the future of art, there is the vision, there are the tools,
the potential, the skills and the means and where it is happening, a
swell of audience, a quiet revolution to which others will gently
wake

On Jun 7, 5:42 pm, Gary Thomas <gary.tho...@mac.com> wrote:
> oh come on simon..you know I wasn't deriding 'digital art' as we know it..
>
> And I'm not sure ACE does know it the way(s) we do.
>
> Try google images for 'digital art', but not if you've just eaten.
>
> On 7 Jun 2011, at 17:20, Simon Biggs wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > Well, there is far more to digital art than fractals, just as there is more
> > to video art than watching paint dry, and we all know that. I am sure ACE
> > knows it too.
>
> > But this NESTA/ACE initiative is not about digital art (or art, per se).
> > This is NESTA territory, seeking to support SME's in their industrial
> > sector. Crowd-sourcing, co-creation and co-design are popular themes (I am a
> > PI on a £1.2 million SFC funded project looking at the interaction of social
> > media with creative media in the Scottish context - Moving Targets). But
> > this is not ACE territory and they shouldn't be spending money destined for
> > supporting the arts on this sort of activity. This is about industry, not
> > art. Can somebody please tell them that.
>
> > I would have expected ACE to have been very protective of its funds,
> > especially at a time like this, and focusing its support on core activities
> > - the creative arts. Obviously they haven't read their mission statement
> > lately.
>
> > Best
>
> > Simon
>

> > On 07/06/2011 16:45, "Gary Thomas" <gary.tho...@mac.com> wrote:
>
> >>http://www.nesta.org.uk/areas_of_work/creative_economy/digitial_rnd/a...

> >> tures/digital_rd_programme_definitions
>
> >> It's specifically for "digital projects which seek to expand audience reach
> >> and engagement and/or to develop new business models"  And this seems a
> >> strange way of putting something in its place..: "Projects involving
> >> innovation in art form innovation are in scope insofar as they meet the
> >> programme's audience reach/engagement and/or business model objectives."
>
> >> Also in these guidelines, ACE is explicit that it supports "digital art".
> >> Which seems an arbitrary and meaningless term for them to use. I'm sure they
> >> know what they mean by it, though it always makes me think of fractals.
>
> >> 'Crowd sourcing scoping' seems a grand way of describing what they did with
> >> google...  

> >>http://www.nesta.org.uk/areas_of_work/creative_economy/digitial_rnd/a...

> >> tures/digital_rd_programme_scoping_exercise
>
> > Simon Biggs
> > si...@littlepig.org.uk
> >http://www.littlepig.org.uk/
>

> > s.bi...@eca.ac.uk
> >http://www.elmcip.net/
> >http://www.eca.ac.uk/circle/

[Simon Biggs]

Hi Gary

I know you know we know... ;)

But am surprised ACE might not. Isn't that what their policy department and
project officers are for? You use to be one. Do you think there is such a
disconnect now? Have you remained in contact with any insiders?

Google images for "art" will also make you ill. "poetry" even more so.

Best

Simon

[Pauline van Mourik Broekman]

Yeah, but in presenting this as a top-down gearing of the process by
NESTA & co., surely we must pay attention to the complicated way in
which the 'sectoral' interview process - which is being used to underpin
and legitimate the grant's entire modus operandi - led to something that
we recognise as industry driven, or commercial, in its directives,
rather than artistic. I mean, if you read the MTM report in detail, then
arguably all that NESTA/ACE/AHRC are doing is rising to the instructions
of 'us', in the arts. The devil is in the detail, of course, and it's
manifestly clear that many interviewed (in the feisty category 'A' of
organisations - which are the digitally driven ones, and thus the most
experienced and skilled in the area in question) were at pains to draw
attention to the importance of creative practice; and that all discussed
the potential barriers to applying, the opacity of these processes, the
potential problem of lack of clear directives and assessment criteria,
and more.

So it's somewhere in the distillation of these views into six broad
industry-ish categories that, notionally, 'emerged' as priorities that
the funders may have played a role. But, giving them the benefit of the
doubt for a minute, what this document and associated grant programme
also clearly speaks of is the ubiquitous blurring between 'arts' and
'commercial' priorities, and their long interpenetration, for which
technology often seems to act as a conduit.

I don't know how these category 'A' organisations, many representatives
of which are clearly gathered here (you can detect the CODA
conversations bouncing quietly across the MTM text), were supposed to
circumvent this 'lock' in the system, particularly as they only
presented a third or so of those consulted. Additionally, it seems
important to acknowledge that their/our concerns shouldn't be
centralised just by dint of 'their' medium aligning with the
infrastructures and methods being funded (as it's a Good Thing these are
spread across the arts as a whole).

So... for me the question remains - as it does in so many areas of
politics - what do you do when 'your' own statements, when represented
to you, end up seeming inimical to the basic tenets of your practice.

Best,
Pauline.

--
Pauline van Mourik Broekman
Director
Mute Publishing
46 Lexington Street
London
W1F 0LP

W: http://www.metamute.org
W: http://www.openmute.org
E: pau...@metamute.org

*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*

Don't miss our...

Critical history of global networked culture:
PROUD TO BE FLESH: http://www.metamute.org/ptbf

Reader on political art in creative cities:
NO ROOM TO MOVE: http://www.metamute.org/nrtm

Whole nine yards:
MUTE ARCHIVE, 1994-2008: http://www.metamute.org/archive

[Gary Thomas]

I think there's more evidence - anecdotal and concrete - of disconnect than connect.

The ACE NPO decisions, the knee jerk reaction, and the NESTA partnership suggest to me a lack of confidence and failure to engage or understand. Everything Pauline said earlier!

The slowness is really depressing. Five years ago, almost to the day, when I was at ACE, I wrote a draft Digital Distribution Action Plan for the Arts - it was to inform a "high level digital strategy proposition". It was very  straightforward manner, and argued for Connection, Creativity and Conversation. I was quite proud of it. Five years later, they come up with the Digital R&D guidelines that I find perplexing in many ways.

The response to the CODA letter from Andrew Nairne puts 'us' in our place - "many of the issues and questions you raise we are currently debating and discussing with artists and arts organisations" "through dialogue with you and with the wider sector"

I don't know many people there now, but those I do don't have a clue as to the complexity and richness of digital-engaged practice - and I think they have utter disrespect for 'audience' engagement in digital contexts.

But I would say that, wouldn't I. 

Anthony Lilley is Arts Council England's Digital Media Associate and I understand he's informed much of their thinking. http://www.magiclantern.co.uk/aboutus/people/anthony.aspx

[marc garrett]

Hi all,

Anthony Lilley has won BAFTA and Peabody Award's - 'winning'
interactive media producer who has worked on projects such as Top Gear,
Doctor Who, Teletubbies...

The future's so bright we better wear shades ;-)

marc

>>>> si...@littlepig.org.uk <mailto:si...@littlepig.org.uk>
>>>> http://www.littlepig.org.uk/
>>>>
>>>> s.b...@eca.ac.uk <mailto:s.b...@eca.ac.uk>

>>>> http://www.elmcip.net/
>>>> http://www.eca.ac.uk/circle/
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> Simon Biggs

>> si...@littlepig.org.uk <mailto:si...@littlepig.org.uk>

[Simon Biggs]

I'm not sure I have seen the Andrew Nairne response.

Is your ACE report in the public domain?

Best

Simon

[Simon Biggs]

Teletubbies?!? LOL. Is that what they understand as an emergent social
model?

Best

Simon

Simon Biggs

[Gary Thomas]

i don't think so - it was an internal working document. There was a great team of officers across the country back then - not least Rachel Baker of course, but around the country. 

this came from CODA on 13 May..

To the Council of Digital Arts,

 

Thank you for your letter of 28 April to myself, Liz Forgan and Alan Davey, in which you proposed an ongoing dialogue about future investment in digital culture.  The Arts Council would very much welcome this, particularly as many of the issues and questions you raise we are currently debating and discussing with artists and arts organisations.  To this end, we would like to make a detailed and formal response to your letter at the end of June.

 

One of those discussions will of course be on Saturday at the Future Everything conference. Arts Council Relationship Manager Lucy Dusgate will be coming along to this meeting. Lucy will be there very much in a listening capacity at this time, rather than to give any detailed responses to your letter. She will ensure that views represented are fed back to her colleagues.

 

I hope that this exchange, and the discussion on Saturday,  is the beginning of a longer and productive conversation. I also hope that through dialogue with you and with the wider sector, we can work together to achieve the goals and priorities set out in our strategic framework, Achieving great art for everyone.

 

Yours sincerely,

 

Andrew Nairne

 

 

Executive Director, Arts

Arts Council England

 

 

14 Great Peter Street

London

SW1P 3NQ

 

 

http://www.artscouncil.org.uk

Arts Council England is the trading name of the Arts Council of England registered charity no. 1036733

The information in this e-mail is for the named recipient(s) only. If you are not the intended recipient, be advised that you have received this email in error and that any use, dissemination, forwarding, printing, or copying of this email is strictly prohibited.

The contents of this message will not be in any way binding upon Arts Council England. Opinions, conclusions, contractual obligations and other information in this message, in so far as they relate to the official business of Arts Council England must be specifically confirmed in writing. 

Additionally, the information contained in this email may be subject to public disclosure under the Freedom of Information Act 2000.

Arts Council England does not accept liability for any virus, spyware or malware introduced by this e-mail.
_