ArtBabbleĀ was launched in April 2009 as a showcase for high-quality art video content from a variety of sources. It pools resources from different institutions to serve a large collective audience as a one-stop venue for watching videos about art, artists, exhibitions, and museums (including how-to about conservation, education, etc). The website just received a redesign.
The original ArtBabble was designed toĀ lookĀ friendly. The new interface gives it a more serious look while actuallyĀ makingĀ it more friendly. The former goofy, child-like character has given way to a āyoung professionalā look. In spirit it is the same, and the growing international group of contributing partners is a testament to its success. The site was initially developed in-house by the Indianapolis Museum of Art and launched with content from only a handful of partners. The number of international contributors has grown to 54. While some important institutions remain absent, it is fair to say that the site is doing well in meeting its objective of becoming the go-to venue for art video online. (See this early assessment inĀ The Guardian)
The success is due, in large part, to the emphasis on content-delivery over other institutional constraints. ArtBabble is wonderfully free of hierarchy: Where else can the Tang Museum at Skidmore College play equally alongside the Metropolitan Museum of Art? All partner institutions are on the same footing. The selection of most popular videos, for example, does not reveal the institution that created the video. Only a thumbnail and video title serve as the preview, with the full information appearing only after it is selected. And while it is possible to quickly browse all of the videos created by any given institution, the site is clearly designed to emphasize content-based relationships among all videos.
Another great outcome of the shared platform is a general raising of standards āĀ regarding both the technical quality and the originality of content. The museums can no longer operate behind a veil of regional isolationism. Geography loses relevance as they all speak to the same potential audience in the digital realm. This will reduce duplication of overexposed subjects and in turn forces each institution to focus on its unique qualities and abilities. For example, a search for artist Catherine Opie yields six video results from four institutions. Each offers a particular angle that contributes new information, and I am sure that the availability of this material on the same page will influence future videos produced about the artist. The healthy competition created by ArtBabble not only requires museums to broaden their definition of peer institutions but should also influence programming decisions in the physical realm.
A lot more can be said about this site and its content beyond the affects of its collaborative concept. Of particular interest is the cross-tagging of content over five main browsing menus: Theme, Medium, Period & Style, Location, and People. Additionally one can select Museum Practice, Video Type, and Language. The subjects under Theme are worthy of an investigation in itself, but I have to leave that for another day. These browse menus function very well in organizing content based on areas of interest, although it is unfortunate that only one filter can be applied at a time. Especially as content continues to build up, it would be useful to apply multiple browse filters. Already the Theme of āBeing an Artistā yields 186 results the order of which isnāt revealed and cannot be further sorted. Options such as sorting by popularity, posting date, institution, or any of the other browse categories such as Period and Style, Medium, or Location would make the results much more manageable.Ā
A final point of critique is that ArtBabble describes itself as a platform for āfree flowing conversationā and āa place where everyone is invited to join an open, ongoing discussionā. The website does not support this type of interaction or discussion among its users, nor does it suggest ways for the users (=viewers) to interact with the partner insitutions (=publishers). Instead, it offers a fairly conventional one-way communication between the institutions posting material and the audience viewing it. It could be said that ArtBabble provides a platform for a conversation among the partner institutions, and that is perhaps where it has the greatest impact (as I noted above). Still lacking in this latest iteration of its interface design is a higher degree of interaction that might lead to real āongoing discussionsā beyond leaving comments or sharing links externally on Facebook or Twitter.