Content provided in partnership with
Contemporary art, uncovered: a survey of major newspapers and weekly magazines suggests that visual art is steadily losing ground in the popular press, even as its audience—and market—grows exponentially
Art in America, Feb, 2007 by Peter Plagens
While noting that almost all newspapers have made cutbacks in the coverage of "the arts" at the same time coverage of the effluvia of popular culture has "exploded," the Monitor's Thomas says that visual art might have some specific drawbacks. First, there's what he calls "the snoot factor"--the perception that modern and contemporary art is intelligible only to a rich, initiated elite. Second, he says, "there's no Picasso," no dominant figure around to pique the general public's interest. The same might be said for critics. The arch-conservative but astute and hilariously readable Hilton Kramer is long gone from the New York Times and recently absent from the New York Observer; Time magazine is bereft of the kettle drum of Robert Hughes who, even in retirement, is still the most listened-for voice in American art criticism. In recent years, these two were the only art critics whose bylines sold their publications, rather than the reverse.
- Most Popular Articles in Arts
- Art since 1900: Modernism, Antimodernism, Postmodernism
- Free-standing cardboard sculpture
- What makes a successful business person? Business people who are tops in ...
- Take advantage of local advertising: TV, newspaper or magazines? If your ...
- Tino Sehgal at the ICA
- More »
Newspapers and, though to a much lesser degree, magazines, used to be owned by families and family dynasties, e.g., the Chandlers of the Los Angeles Times. Comfortable profit margins came more easily back before cable television and the Internet, and ownership cared less about big profits than exercising political power and local clout. They could cover a loss-leader like art if they felt like it. Though they often felt like it for reasons of quasi-philistine noblesse oblige rather than genuine interest, they covered it. Today, more and more newspapers have been gobbled up by publicly held national and international media companies. Profits and returns for stockholders have assumed prime importance. As a result, the editorial content of those newspapers has shifted. "News you can use," "'cope' journalism," "up close and personal" articles and the lowdown on Brad and Angelina have grown exponentially. Art coverage--supported by very little advertising revenue--has shrunk. The newer corporate owners of newspapers generally remain just as politically conservative as, and possibly more culturally conservative than, the family owners they supplanted. To them, contemporary art is at best a harmless, goofball amusement, at worst a threat to civilization as we know it, and on balance a cultural irritant. In their heart-of-hearts, they don't want to read about contemporary art in their newspapers and they figure their readers don't want to either.
Moreover, the operational structure of not only the popular press but also the media as a whole has changed radically. In the old days, says Stevens, "it was hard to have lots of pictures and a lot of layout razzle-dazzle. So words filled up more of the page.... Now, editors are constantly tempted to enlarge photos, add new ones, move this and that--the result is fewer words. That's happening everywhere in the press. Call it the 'USA Today effect.' No attention span. Nothing but tasty little gobbets. Fast-food press." And as soon as a television set appeared in every American home, weekly--even daily--doses of news were no longer frequent enough. Today's minute-by-minute Internet has, to understate the case ridiculously, increased the disadvantages of delay. The Internet has also democratized and "participator-ized" the media. Readers not only want to talk back onscreen, they want to see their back talk posted right next to the paid writers' stuff. Fewer people in the audience for contemporary art care what some allegedly august, published-on-paper critic thinks about a given artist or exhibition.
