Google
« All Docs
MCN 2012 GAP On T...

NEW LOCATION HERE:

http://smithsonian-webstrategy.wikispaces.com/Google+On+Trial--Is+the+Google+Art+Project+Good%3F

Hey everyone!!

I’ve moved these notes to the Smithsonian Web and New Media Strategy Wiki to make it easier to make/track edits and to give it some context (rather than it just being an isolated document out in cyberspace)

THANKS!!!  [M. Edson, 2011-11-11 at 11:40am EST]


Welcome... MIke edson here. I’ll be taking running notes. Please feel free to add and clarify as we go. Maybe put comments into [brackets] or use the Insert COmmnets feature.

{I’m a lousy typist - - fast but inaccurate.. }

[Mike Edson here again, on Sunday, the day after the session. I’ll be cleaning up the document and adding context, notes, action items, & clarifications over the next few days..

THANK YOU to everyone who participated, our awesome panelists, and Piotr Adamczyk from Google!!!!! - - M.E., 2012-11-11.]

- - - - - - -

Prosecution:

“Google Art Project” - - Google goes first. Then Art... right from the beginning, clear pictur eof how Google thinks about culture.

Defense
“Metropolitan” “Museum” of “Art”

that’s the priorities there

Google provides publishing platform for SMALL mueums, and large

infrastructure is difficult to fund/manntain

Google provides it.

HOW MANY OF US have reached out to small institutions???

Google has done that!

Some museums have taken content from GAP and released it high rez and free

(SMK in DK)

WHo on else could cold-call 15+ institutions

---

prosecutioin:

we’re concerned about “top-10” culture project. greatest hits

“Just give us your nice things that you can do easily”

(SKIMMING off of the top easiet things.) [who does the hardest work?]

annnd if it doesn’t show up in search it doesn’t exist...

inequity in arts engagement.

“It’s a grain in sand” holding it up as a bright.

Defense:

… top 10 may evolve over time. museums make choices... assumed masterpieces of the we...

Precisely the fact that you are not seeing it ranked - - it’s flattened - - that’s beneficial .

Q for Piotr (he’s agreed to be on the record”

is Google going to ask more museums..

“the project goes just as fast as I can type” (P. A.)

Defense: themuseums choose the objects

---

prosecution: assumption is that “because it’s google, it must be good...”

but we don’t have the data to back up the assertions yet. We’ve ben  promised the  data but we’have not seen it.

Pros: Goog/prosecution is making assertions about the value that we have’t validated yet.

If any other partner came to the table...we’d ask them more

Piotr: “many of the orgs we deal with don’t  have websites...”

teh way we approached institutions is via local google country teams who have local knw of the museums... we’re happy to start conversation w any non profit

---

Defense.

Assertion: what we have/show in  museums was not MADE to be put in museums... ( so  goog is just another re-framing of the context... Museums are just one context of many)

GAP can smooth over peaks and vally of curatorial time/effort...)

 - analysis of incoming traffic (though we didn’t join to generate traffic)

 - dwell time and page views: longer dwell, 7 mins (compared to 2.5) and many more pages via traffic from GAP referrals - - these are high value visits that we have a hard time getting

Prose: do we have detailed

Piort - - we’ve had 15 M visits in last 6 months {verifi that i got this right]

NOTE: anyone who uses g analytics can provide their code to GAP and harvest their own stats.

Pros: our brand is strong, but it’s nothing compared with Google, or the Met.

“we’ve had less than 30 visits a month from GAP” we’re just watered down - - if we dont’ have big name behind us, or if GUI encouraged

Def: why is it necessary to have traffic toyour site to assume benefit?

Pro: a) we dont’ ahve stats. b) we needed to assume some direct benefits to justify the effort, protect ourselves in the press. We need some kind of measure. …[how does this

 - there was no real transparence about benefits

 - we weren’t allowed to talk to other contributing institutions

 - we aren’t getting traffic back, so maybe the “democratizing” effect isn’t happening

 - we can’t contribute culturally sensitive materials to GAP so we NEED referral traffic to expose people to that content - - core to mission

Def:

 - everyone GAP partner needs to set up analytics [note: email was jsut sent a few days about ago how to do...]

 - [copyright... {i missed this... fill in later}

 - [Frack - - missed what was said here at 11:am]

Def

 - we think of GAP as a publication: it’s not. It’s an aggregation. In the future a number of things will happen to make it better... In last year we’ve seen G ramping up. Participatory tools that we’d expect to see on top of an aggregation.

[ME: for later -- what are implications of using the FULL G platform: social, maps...]

Pros: ...I’ve received empty promises for partners.

NEED TO focus on what GAP is NOW.

Q: is there a governance process?

A (Piotr): the Goog Cultural Inst, board meets... and we communicate w partners about near term features... we’re a small team within the company...we expect to get feature requests from the partners.

Q: is there transparency for Goog Cult Inst board? A: Don’t know {need fo follow up}

[missed some stuff here]

Piotr: “It isn’t good enough already”

“Yes, of course the site can ber strongger...”

{NOTE: “not good enough already” = meme}

Def: this is our business. it’s one of many other platforms for aggregated …

Pros: I’m more comfortable with that whenI knowthe values of the orgs involved.

GAP is (touted) as an effort to bring culture to the world... and yoet, when you hear GAP talk about the project. what’s discussed (launch in Paris)... [laughter], who got to talk? Google employees not artists, curators - - the museum people were in ANOTHER room, not where the press was, we didn’t even see them.

def: AU launch event, the museum people were in the room and the goog  people dissapeared into the background....different launhees happen differently...

Piotr - - “I was not in Paris...” (laughter)

[NOTE:

B REAK : TALK ABOUT

 - talk about copyright: contributors can select things themselves. Some of us dont’ have funds to research copyright. can afford.

 - UXD

 - BECAUSE it’s Google, rich (presumed?) and pwoerful, is the bar  higher?

 - - - are we doing the RIGHT stuff, not just the easy stuff?

 - ME: isn’t this inevitable re: platform strategy.

UXD - -

Defense: it’s going to have to get better.

COPYRIGHT:

Pros: what this represents as a snapshot, human culture, ...shared collective heritage/output.

Def: “ip protected works” not showing their presence

{ME: use the convening power to do hard things that nobody else can do )/morally...

 Like BOOKS project?)

Def: more focus...help succeed in funding

clarification:Piotr: project is copyright clear or copyright free: we take guidance from the institution...

ME: does googl have an obligation as a powerful convener to do highly principled/ethical good for humanity... Europeana endurance re: pub domain

 - - -

Pros: the public doesn’t KNOW the inside physics/deal/authirty relationships.

fantastic work going around the world re: opening up access - - but none of that is visible on GAP because (yale british work)... no indication that the works are re-usable cc-0,,, you can’t see it

Def: ..can’t Google just do this (good point re: they’re reusing cc-0 like we want anybody to)

Pros: Google isn’t providing any money, huge time investment for museums

no $ for copyright clearance, no $ for smlal museums in Africa. All the muoney goes through goog

ME: rant re: most US mseums donet have staff to even TLK with google. Indithment of the US museum industry...

Piotr: (missed it..  Go back to 11:30am)

Def: re; the money. Google did not create this problem for us. AMICO participants PAID $$ to participate in that project. Google isn’t asking for $$ and IT”S SUCCEEDING!!!! (which Amico didn’t)...  w’re not raising $$ where we need it, that’s not google’s

Pros: Google has made a VERY low commitment to partners.

Compare w. Google BOoks - - G worked w partners to digitize, gave a copy, metadata, ...GOOGLE ahs invested NOTHING in the orgs... No more impressive than the Flickr Commons...

Defense:... but participation is voluntary. (take it or leave it)

Pros: Flickr commons is a good comparison.

When tiems got rough the support at Flickr dried up...

That may/eill happen. If small org devotes its resources to this project, what happens with GAP changes its mind.

Def: orgs still have metadata, imgs...

Piotr: 55 of the orgs have indoor street view and gigapixel photo

[ME: do museums need to be better, more organized partners?]

[ME: 3rd party re-use and value add (kahn acad)

 - -

Def: more people have more chances of seeing something that …(changes them, makes them fufilled...) - - [that’s the big win]

Def: [... (missed it) ]

Pros: but we haven’t seen the  data

…the way you find out what users are doing is to ...find out what user are doing...

Def: it’s a discovery tool

Def: we spend a lot of time on multiple platforms that do nothing for us (and that we have no authority over)...pinterest, facebook... etc. we can’t always. We look at GAP the same way.

 - -

prosec: resource question. The resources needed to participate in GAP is > +++ than doing the facebook page. The opportunity cost of doing GAP could have been put into longer term wins... you’ll never get that back.

[some argument about how much resources it takes]

[ACTION REQUIRED: assess this for the sake of partners]

statement: it’s a LOT Of work to partner on projects like this. We do need a discussion in the community about havign a redistributor in this community... Could google do this for us?

 - - POINT OF ORDER - -

(some summary of highlighted...)

 - come back ~11:45 - - google nonprofit obligation

Curtis Wong (speaking on the record)

 - artmuseum.net - - Intel, trying to show thepublic what’s poissible in teh future for broadband - - that’ was the corporate motivation for Intel. Artmuseum.net was curatorially driven. Differetn. Was museum focused. Museum shop that let them sell stuff, revenue share, It was aobut how we can get thepublic aware of hwat the … the harder thing is about interpretation where you involve the museums to create an annotation layer...

Piotr: do look at the google history prroejct, 30 partners doing exhibits, can allow exhibition creation, commenting, ..if the community expresses an interest...

[me; help g set an agenda: GOVERNANCE]

 - --  -

audience: Walters did create data set w; field: “description” by curator, with interpreation, one of the many data points... (may not have been there all along)

Audience: “I just looked at this project right now”... This is more than a stock photo, no interpretation =, prob is that more interpretation that’s put into it puts burden on the org...resource issue

 

[ME: It’s a PRODUCT...]

Audience: the key is in integration...   pair w. google goggles (we get as benefit of participating)... there needs tob e much greater integration w. museum on site/off site, get together convene museum workers...why aren’t we all getting together to say “hey, let’s do am ehibition together... (we can’t borrow ‘cause we’re in an earthquake zone...”

Audience2: Goggles is a great point: ebolution of platform will be “what it is, but somehow better” - - but we’re creating this ground-level “bit” that … Goggles turns it into something else

11:54AM]

Audience: museums taking a passive role; package content … so can do a …

Audience: the “not having resources problem” is real. GAP isn’t the first project that’s popped up. … Every time a project comes up the museum has to ..muster resources... That’s just teh way it is. it’s life [my words]. ...improving the data is the work museums can/should be doing

------

Piotr: I’ve constructed the data so... ledo records..

 - - - - - -

Def: none of us would say that there aren’t things we want to improve about GAP. But it’s going to improve. INSIST: museums need to take better advantage of the opportunitties that are given to them [ME: Note: Capacity!!!!!!!!!]

For 10 years: debate silly: taking photos in the galleryies.

Museums have OBLIGATION to partner, take opportunities (me: ref koven” “never turn down a gig”)... “The real world is 3x faster than the museum world.” “we’ve tried for 20 years to do what G has done in 2 years” (paraphrase)...

...depth of oppurtinnity for the museum... and you don’t have to...always take the chance so you can build on/learn from your mistakes

[NOON}

pros: it’s easy to put GOOG on trial. Any big company.. (many of these problems are not new) but nobody blame you for picking on google. But, Google is actually a really great partner in many ways...

Another force at work: “The Bad Partner” - - hwo isn’t equitable about data,...   for every GAP there’s another that’s “you’ll get the API next year...it’s coming” (failure of other vendors making promises”

need to temper. We had a rough start with the GLAM folks - - now it’s WAAYYY better. you need to