How The Crisis Could Remake Music & Cultural Cities Policy
Before I go on:
- What is most important is your health and safety. Sound Diplomacy’s offices are closed indefinitely and we’re all working from home. We are social distancing. I hope you’re doing the same.
- This article is not meant to predict anything. It is too early to tell what, if anything, this crisis will do in terms of changing the world. But as my mentor (who I have had more time to talk to lately) tells me, train hard & fight easy.
- There are some incredible resources out there for creatives suffering financially in this crisis. Here are some terrific initiatives: Billboard’s list of resources and live streaming opportunities; Germany’s nationwide Covid-19 Hackathon; Springboard’s artist resources; Vibe Lab’s Nightlife tracker. There’s hundreds more.
As I wrote in my previous post, this crisis proves the global importance of music. Italians and Spaniards are jamming via their balconies. Artists are finding new ways to connect with audiences (Code Orange live streamed a show to 15,000 people; my friends Arkells are teaching their songs via Instagram). Over 30 artists came together for a Quarantine Festival in Spain, each performing in their bedrooms. Online choirs are being assembled. Dozens of GoFundMe’s have emerged to support venues, artists and initiatives. This not only shows how much we as a society value music, arts and culture, but also how important it is that we safeguard it. If we didn’t think this way, there’d be no appeals. There’s thousands.
I am a music policy wonk. It is my job and my passion. To me, policy about creating better, more supportive regulations so we can protect what we take for granted and doing so in a way that people adhere to them because they see it as good for them. In a perfect world we wouldn’t have a rule mandating people wear seatbelts. It’s common sense. But we do, because it’s important to remind, assure and require the adherence to a common good, like seatbelts.
Over the past few years I have been developing, testing and disseminating an argument that asks policymakers to consider music as a piece of core, civic infrastructure. By music I don’t mean any specific genre or discipline, but the creation, maintenance and safeguarding of its systems (I call it the ecosystem). To best explain this, I use analogies. Water is a favourite. We all take clean water or a hot shower for granted if we’re lucky enough to have it. And when we take a drink or turn on the tap, we don’t take into account the filtration, pipes, desalination and infrastructure that goes into getting the water to us. It just happens.
And clean water is only important when you don’t have it.
As this crisis unfolds, access to clean water and pipes have not been called into question (any more than before the crisis). This is because cities invest in water purification, transport, maintenance, staffing etc…. We all pay for it out of taxes. We don’t offer some people still and others sparkling. Everyone gets (or at least should) clean water. Because we can’t live without it.
I’ve made this argument at the United Nations, European Commission, at SXSW, MIPIM and other places. Most who listen ‘get it’ when I liken the moment a song impacts us with the same act as drinking a glass of clean water. We don’t pay attention to what made that moment happen — which in the case of the song includes making instruments, music education, building recording studios, writing, recording and marketing. We fail to recognise the jobs in the supply chain and the impact those jobs have on our communities. We only recognise their importance when they go, as is now happening with the closure of bars, restaurants, music venues and cancellation of festivals.
What this crisis demonstrates is proof that what we’re doing is not working. Festivals are improperly insured, which means layoffs. Businesses that rely on festivals reduce staff. People are laid off. The corresponding burden on the public purse increases, as more people are forced to apply for subsidence support. Like the rest of the gig economy, in some countries like the US there’s no health care provisions so when someone gets sick, everybody pays more.
This is all due to a lack of recognising music, culture and the arts in general as core, civic infrastructure in full. Sure, some disciplines enjoy support (like a classical concert hall), but there is no risk mitigation in the music ecosystem. There’s little civic infrastructure policy to support it. But at the same time, we demand music and culture. We need it for our wellbeing. And at the same, the systems that support it in society are being decimated.
So, what could we do differently?
- Develop a Cultural Infrastructure Resolution Framework: I am working on this. First, outline what music & cultural infrastructure is (London’s done a good job). Write down — intentionally — that like roads, schools, hospitals and water pipes, cultural infrastructure is an essential public need. Because it is.
- Cultural Governance Must Change: The framework of having a ‘Department of Cultural Affairs’ doesn’t work. A separate department tasked with managing specific bits of cultural infrastructure means the ecosystem as a whole is not recognised as an ecosystem. Culture must be prevalent in education, planning, regeneration, public health, zoning, licensing. It is transversal but must be intentionally included. Time and time again we encounter cities whose Office of Culture, Creative Economy or, in some cases, Music operate with minimal budgets. And not having a budget means you are not important. However, the loss of cultural events, for example, is demonstrating an economic strain in the hundreds of billions globally. Cultural infrastructure needs to be funded as part of core a budget like any other essential public good. This means changing how we view culture in budgets. It’s not ‘over there’. It is part of everything. Music, Arts and Culture needs to be embedded across all departments.
- It Is Time For Investment Parity: Culture Is As Important As Any Other Sector. It Needs To Be Financed As Such: The model of incentivising outside investment — via tax breaks and other public handouts — has limitations. Investment vehicles are not designed for music and culture. The fact that tax increment finance is designed for big projects like arenas and stadiums but are difficult to utilise for smaller initiatives like community theatres or local recording studios exacerbates this problem. Culture remains a quid pro quo negotiation. I get another floor of apartments if I dedicate the ground floor as a music venue. This doesn’t work. I recognise we need better models to evaluate the economic impact of music, arts and culture, whatever it is. But we are all local somewhere and the connection to our communities is necessary. To me, there’s a financial incentive to rethink how cities invest in music and culture now — focus on local and grassroots, deploy patient capital, evaluate community development as a currency in and of itself.
- When crisis hits, we all become democratic socialists: When we need help, we ask for it. And if we believe music is important — playing it, learning it, seeing it, experiencing it, talking about it — than we must recognise that as a public, wherever we are, we need to invest in it like we do with other things we deem important — public transit, mental health support, roads, climate action etc…. But we need to change. For example, in the UK, the government ring fenced £120m for a ‘Festival of Britain’ to happen in 2022, yet grassroots music venues require £3.7m per week for all 660 to survive. I’d rather give each venue 32 weeks of fiscal support than plan a big party in 2 years’ time.
We have been working for years on a model that recognises music as a public good. Music as clean water. Music as clean air. Music as a roof over our heads. This is the time for policymakers to listen.
