What if there were more commandments, but only beyond a paywall?

I have lost the Globe and Mail, and it hasn’t simply been buried under a stack of old magazines. Next week, I lose The Chicago Tribune. I have already begun to mourn.

My losses are not because these newspapers are going out of business. It is because they are moving behind paywalls, as many other papers have done to insure their online content isn’t being read for free, as these companies struggle to remain solvent. Having spent a certain amount of time every morning for the past few years seeking out theatre and arts stories to share on Twitter, I know that the loss of these two outlets will shrink the pool of intelligent coverage from which I can draw. Still, I am sympathetic to the papers, because as I have said before, if we want quality journalism – and I believe we need it – we have to be prepared to pay for it.

But…

Over the past 20 years, long before my Twitter curation, I’ve found the online access to arts coverage from around the country, and the world, to be an enormous asset in my continuing professional education. Indeed, where my only sources for arts news outside of my local paper (wherever I was living) were The New York Times and USA Today (and occasionally The Wall Street Journal), the advent of online newspapers and magazines enabled me to read features and reviews as never before. Yes, Variety had reviews from around the country and a handful of weekly feature stories, the accelerating decline of that publication sapped it of its once essential nature. I suspect I am hardly alone.

Arts coverage on the web eliminated the inefficient need to ask for, or send, coverage around by fax, a highly inefficient samizdat network of like-minded individuals who already knew one another. More importantly, with the rise of social media, it enabled the broad-based sharing of coverage, helping to bring arts aficionados closer with the opportunity to discover and discuss subjects raised in the press regardless of geography and without skipping from website to website in hope of finding worthwhile material.

So how do I reconcile this cognitive dissonance, this belief in paying for good journalism and a passion for access to arts coverage from wherever it may be found?

I’d like to suggest that arts coverage remain free online, unlike the rest of a newspaper’s content. Even as such coverage has diminished and remains under threat (one of the country’s largest cities, Philadelphia, no longer has a full-time theatre critic at any daily paper in the market), newspapers are the last bastion of mainstream arts coverage, long ignored by television locally or nationally.

Precisely because the media has demonstrated or declared time and again that arts coverage does not drive their revenues, I think it should remain free for all, whether to support the groups in its local market or facilitate a national conversation. The Wall Street Journal, despite its trendsetting paywall success, maintains its arts blog, “Speakeasy,” outside of access restrictions, and while I would like more of its arts content readily accessible, they’ve at least set a precedent, with no apparent financial harm.

Even as a die-hard consumer of arts coverage, I’m not about to pay $10 or $15 per month to read about what’s happening in Chicago or Toronto in these paywalled publications, especially if I can’t share it. I’ll find at least some of that news through other sites. But as someone living hundreds of miles from these cities, if outlets are fundamentally opposed to any free access, I can’t help but wonder whether something equivalent to sports broadcast blackouts could apply; you pay if your IP address is located within 90 miles of the publication’s base, but those outside that circle have vastly less expensive access.

There’s a double-edged sword to hiding arts coverage behind paywalls. On the one hand, the publication may be securing its revenue base (although it may be forcing people to unprotected news resources elsewhere in the market). But in the case of arts coverage, it may well drive the growth of new online-only resources, creating a viable market for arts-specific sites – thereby advancing the irrelevancy of what the paper is providing for a steadily diminishing audience. That will then serve as the excuse to further cut arts coverage.

Am I anti-blog or online magazine? Hardly. But outside of a handful of online publications that do include arts and culture coverage (Slate, Salon and Grantland come first to mind), the majority of what is out there isn’t economically viable, and therefore relies on unpaid (read volunteer or self-produced) coverage, limiting its long-term prospects. Are there superb blogs? Absolutely. But when they write about anything beyond their own immediate vicinity, they’re predominantly relying on other outlets for the news upon which they then re-report or opine.

It’s ironic that I write this while living in New York City, which offers more variety of daily and weekly arts coverage than most cities. But as I hope I’ve shown in my writing, I don’t consider New York as the be-all and end-all of the arts; there’s superb work worth seeing, or at least knowing about, everywhere. Yet with each paywall announcement, I feel my world narrowing, headed backwards to the pre-internet era, and it troubles me greatly.

I urge those who have or would have paywalls to continue to treat the arts as a loss leader and maintain that coverage online for free or almost free, outside of local and national news, business coverage and sports. You’ll keep America’s arts healthy by providing the raw material of national conversation and you’ll make sure that we’re talking about you, too. Because you want to remain part of the conversation too, don’t you?

Sherman, the boy adopted by the dog Mr. Peabody, and my failed avatar.

It began, I believe, Friday afternoon, on a whim. Although I tend to the pedantic in my blogging, I can be taken by whimsy. Any of my Twitter followers can tell you how enamored I am of hashtag games.

The inciting event, such as it was, was spurred by the fact that I’ve been on Twitter for some three and half years now, and the same photo has been my identifier, my avatar, throughout that time. I thought I’d change things up a little, and so I swapped in a cartoon character. If, as I wrote in a tweet, a prestigious playwright like David Lindsay Abaire could have Barney Rubble as an avatar, I could have fun too. And that’s where I went wrong.

My first mistake was to choose a cartoon character who is not terribly well remembered by many, a minor supporting character on a now-cult TV show that debuted before I was born. That said, the rationale behind my selection would be immediately clear to those who know the show and indeed, messages of charmed approval were the first comments.

But the tone shifted. “When did you make the change,” came one inquiry, impartial, but not at all supportive. My follower count began to slide, albeit slightly. “That doesn’t look like you,” commented another. So after firing off some 100 tweets last night during the Olympic closing ceremony under my new persona, I awoke this morning and asked my followers their opinion. There were a handful who recognized the character, and made the connection (although my college roommate, a fellow trivia buff, didn’t get it). A few people said that without the old photo, they didn’t register that tweets were mine, because they were used to the old avatar. My comments wouldn’t be noticed when quickly scanning a feed.

So as quickly as I became I cartoon, I reverted to myself. There were a few farewells, but a rather passionate response from Robert Falls, artistic director of The Goodman Theatre, convinced me that reversion was the right thing to do. “Thank GOD you’re back!,” tweeted Bob. “Can’t explain why other image was disturbing – just didn’t match your Twitter voice. Seriously.”

And so my whimsical avatar, who was, incidentally, Sherman, the boy adopted by the dog Mr. Peabody on Jay Ward’s Rocky and His Friends (often referred to as The Bullwinkle Show) is banished from my tweets. Privately, I remain in possession of assorted Sherman memorabilia, as friends invariably enjoy giving me hats and plush dolls emblazoned with his image. I have that to amuse me.

Of course what had happened here was that, over the course of several years, I had established a brand on Twitter, and I had arbitrarily violated the expectations of that brand. The cartoon character didn’t represent the online persona I’d cultivated over time. Had I started with it, it may not have been an issue (although a cartoon is hardly the best persona for the range of theatrical content I curate daily). Since I don’t actually know most of my followers, nor they me, it was as if I’d had plastic surgery, badly, in order to enter witness protection.

So my inadvertent experiment this weekend turned in clear (albeit anecdotal) results in record time. Once you establish your personal brand in social media, stick with it. If you’re just playing around with friends, knock yourself out – use a funny avatar. But if you want to be heard, if you want to be recognized, pick an image and stick with it. If you’re an arts organization, don’t change your avatar show by show: stick with your company logo. If you want to be taken seriously, or use social media professionally, be yourself. And to thine own self be true, as some old guy once said, even in this brave new world of social media interaction.

In my case, I don’t think there’s been lasting damage, but if I’d gone on, there might have been. And unlike Mr. Peabody and Sherman, I don’t have a WABAC machine that would have allowed me to set things straight. And if you don’t get that last reference, look it up.

Do we really know who’s behind that screen name?

I have occasion every so often to speak to young or aspiring theatre professionals about their careers and how social media can help, or hinder, their efforts. I tell them, in every case, that they need to think about their public profile. Not the words on their Facebook or Twitter description, though they matter, but the overall impression they give. My counsel is that on social media, they should endeavor to be the best person they can be, the best image of themselves that they want to present, to current, potential and future employers and colleagues. I don’t encourage them to lie or be false, but to remember that what may be acceptable in a circle of personal friends can come off very differently when it reaches strangers or cyber-friends, people who only know them by what they blog, post or tweet.

I describe to them a favorite New Yorker cartoon, which shows a dog, on a desk chair, at a computer, looking down at another dog, on the floor, and saying, via caption, “On the Internet, no one knows you’re a dog.” I believe it illustrates my point about one’s web profile perfectly, even if my verbal retelling saps the cartoon of its humor.

I am reminded of this struggle, to present one’s best self, constantly, in my own efforts. I spend a great deal of time on Twitter trying to curate interesting content; I share links to articles that I think are worth reading, not always because I agree with them, but because I think people should know they’re out there. While I don’t post hate speech or anything close, I have been known to post articles which espouse opinions that are not necessarily commensurate with my own. Just this morning, I provided a link to what I considered a laughable column by the New York Post’s Cindy Adams – and I said so – but I also posted a critical column about the direction of The Public Theatre’s Shakespeare in the Park program without any indication of my position.  A few people wrote to share in my amusement over the Adams column, but several people wrote in strong defense of Shakespeare in the Park and there was an intimation of my foolishness for propagating a specious opinion. A single word could have spun that latter post, “claptrap” perhaps, but I naively wanted people to respond on their own; I had no such compunction about ridiculing the Adams piece.  Should I always let my feelings be known on everything I post? Perhaps, but I want to spark conversations, not end them before they’ve begun. It is a tightrope.

I was also taken to task (mildly) this week for refusing to comment on the inclusion of a musical number from a cruise ship on the Tony Awards broadcast. “Aren’t you a pundit?” I was asked by tweet. I have fashioned myself as one, but a pundit whose opinions are formed by my past and future work within the theatre industry. In the case of this aspect of the Tonys, I said it wouldn’t be appropriate, but I feel the need to be more explicit. It wouldn’t be appropriate because as a former staffer of the American Theatre Wing, I don’t think it’s appropriate for me to make public statements about the organization’s work. I no longer work there, but I’m bound up in the organization’s history and I shouldn’t take my departure as leave to speak at will from the sidelines. My loyalty trumps my commentary, but I make no secret of it; I am neither mouthpiece nor gadfly when it comes to The Wing. I have turned down paid opportunities to write about The Tonys because I think it would be wrong of me to do so. If that undermines me as a pundit, then by all means, look elsewhere.

I had determined when I left the American Theatre Wing that I would not use my blog or Twitter feed to begin offering my opinion of shows; my connection to the Tonys had long given me cover from doing so, as it would have been inappropriate for me to praise or pan potential Tony contenders given my position. Although that rationale is not pertinent, I have chosen to sustain my position. I do not want to be a source of critical opinion about shows. There are plenty of critics; I prefer to discuss the issues of theatre, not the pros or cons of productions. Even offering only praise for shows I enjoy would carry implied criticism for all the shows I didn’t single out; after working professionally for some 30 years, I would also risk offending colleagues and friends, and so I feel I cannot go there. Did I see Timon of Athens and The Iceman Cometh in Chicago this week? Yes. Was the trip worth it? Absolutely. But that’s as far as I go.

Yesterday, I was horrified to realize that I had retweeted a funny message from my friend Laura Benanti, but in haste, working via iPhone, I had accidentally removed the indication that it was a retweet. Consequently, her brilliantly sarcastic remark about anonymous commenters on the Internet was sourced to me, as a number of people retweeted it; because I made the error before going into a five-hour show, it was too late to recall the error in any effective way when I realized it much later. Yet with each retweet, I felt like a plagiarist. I hope she will forgive me. I hope those who follow us both will not think me a thief. (The tweet in question was, “I hope to one day have the courage of anonymous bloggers/posters in comment sections. #TheyAreTheRealHeros.”)

We watch in politics, in sports, in the realm of celebrity, how our actions in social media can trip us up, and how that same media can be used to fan the flames and spread those failures. My impact is negligible compared to Ashton Kutcher, but to some small portion of theatre aficionados, I appear to hold some sway. So I must be transparent in my actions, or lack thereof, online; I must constantly consider whether my messages are the messages I want to convey. Brevity is no excuse – better to not tweet at all than to tweet ambiguously or detrimentally. After 20,000 tweets and more than 100 blog posts, I am still learning, still refining, still never quite vigilant enough. But I must be vigilant, lest I be the dog.

A while back, I wrote with dismay about the ranking systems like Klout, which purport to score your level of influence in social media. For a time, people seemed obsessed with their performance, and a whole new playing field of envy and competition blossomed. There were reports of Klout scores being considered in assessments of job applicants, and a general frenzy took hold. Fortunately, people seem to have grown bored with social ranking, just as the rankers seem to have grown bored with providing the incentives they once promised. Problem solved?

Not so fast.

While familiarity may make us less concerned with those opaque numerical rankings, there’s still a numbers game being played in social media, and there’s no mysterious algorithm at work. It’s the hard and fast numbers of how many people follow you, how many people like you — that’s the new obsession.

Surely you’ve seen a tweet to the effect of, “Only xx followers needed to reach y. Won’t you RT and help?”  Or, if you’ve seen any companies promoting themselves on Facebook, no doubt you’ve been required to “like” them in order to take advantage of some special offer.  But because words such as “friend” and “like” have such power, they seem to carry a weight far beyond there mere click of a button on one’s screen; frankly, “following” someone seems truly disproportionate, unless you harbor dreams of being the next Jim Jones seeking companions on a field trip to Guyana.

I must confess, in my early days on Twitter, I fell victim to this psychological lure and trawled for followers by asking others to help be reach some round-numbered goal. I have also mentioned more than once on Twitter that if one becomes my friend on Facebook, they’ll have access to content different than what’s on my Twitter feed (which is true). But I’ve realized how desperate I may have sounded for approval, for achievement. “Friend” and “like” carry as much weight as in those early school days when you might spend 30 minutes on a playground slide with someone and announce to your parents only hours later that they were your new best friend. Especially peculiar about requests for new Twitter followers is that you can only make it to those who are already following you, so you’re putting your online cohorts on the spot and asking them to endorse you with a retweet. Awkward! I have held the line on LinkedIn – I am not “connected” to anyone with whom I have not had a meaningful professional interaction, which I thought was the point of that site.

The implied endorsement or emotional attachment that the masters of social media have caused us to use can indeed be awkward. I have no feelings whatsoever towards American Express beyond holding a Macy’s charge card, but if I have to “like” them in order to help direct their philanthropy, I’m willing to pretend. I do not blindly “follow” the positions of The New York Times, but I do value their news updates, so I must be publicly perceived as a part of their coterie. A current Off-Broadway play, the title of which refers to a part of the anatomy that is uniquely male and unprintable in the aforementioned Times, now has people declaring that they like said appendage on Facebook, whatever their gender or sexual orientation, to my sophomoric amusement.

All of the social media sites make it easy to find out the number of people’s friends, followers and likes and to know how far they may be from some milestone number. I will only urge people to engage with new contacts who I truly believe to be of genuine value; I am more likely to retweet worthy messages and let each person who reads it decide whether or not they want to see more from that source.  But having suffered the ignominy of being chosen last on the playground for many years, having tried to shield my SAT scores from my peers lest I be labeled “a brain,” I’ve grown to loathe the numerical rat race, and I’ve opted out of it. Desperation, as I learned in my dating years, is unattractive, and doesn’t work.

If my tweets inform or amuse you, perhaps you’ll follow me; if they annoy you, by all means don’t subject yourself to me. If you enjoy pop culture videos (or want to meet up with my high school friends in virtual space), like me on Facebook, because that’s what I can offer you there. But as we have all heard about the media for so many years, and I paraphrase here: “It’s the content, stupid.” And if my content is stupid, I completely understand why no one would follow me where I go online, why they wouldn’t like me, or want to be my friend. Just as it was on the playground, I have to be worthy, or I’ll have no one to play with. And the same is true, in turn, for each of you.

Your friend,

Howard

I had been planning to write about the pros and cons of “Tweet Seats,” weighing the potential of technology to complement live entertainment against its potential for intrusion and distraction. Whatever your opinion may be, I will no longer seek to address it, because such debates could become irrelevant. The reason for that worries me and I hope we will all find consensus as I explain.

Earlier this week, having seen some of my prior tweets and blogs on the topic of Tweet Seats, a regional theatre company (that has asked not to be named) shared with me a letter and supporting documents from the Global IP Law Group in Chicago, in which the firm, representing its client Inselberg Interactive, claims that said theatre has violated patents owned by Inselberg. What had the theatre done? They had a Tweet Seat night last year. The law firm asserted that U.S. Patent 6,975,878 covers the provision of “interactive audience participation at live spectator events,” and indeed that quote is from the patent document itself, which you may review here.

I am not a patent attorney or an expert in the field of intellectual property, but I can read, and I have reviewed this patent; I urge you to do so as well. It refers to a “method” which, among other things,  involves “querying the spectators,” “processing the spectator data into results,” “transmitting the answers to a central processor,” and “broadcasting the results of the processing of spectator data.” It includes two line drawings, one which shows a device not unlike a Motorola flip phone from the 90s, and the other which shows three people using such device at a football game, with scoreboards that read “Answer A, B, C.” Although Tweet Seat events of which I’m aware do not show results on a commonly viewed screen, they are shared with anyone who cares to look at their device, both at the event and elsewhere, which the firm asserts is covered. Interestingly, the patent abstract notes that, “The method includes providing spectators with an interactive device”; while Tweet Seat events require people to use their own phones, but this doesn’t seem to have derailed the claim of infringement. It does seem a bit of extrapolation has taken place.

Deeper into the patent document you can also find what is referred to as a “Detailed Description of the Invention,” but in this case the invention is neither the device nor the software which would make such interaction possible. No, “the invention” is the idea of doing so. Nowhere does the patent suggest that Inselberg invented the smartphone or any of its underlying technology, nor does it make any claim to having invented Facebook, Twitter, LinkedIn or any other program, website or application which easily and freely permits people to communicate with each other and with venues, presenters and producers on smartphones. They patented the concept of using such things at some point in the future when the technology became available, and now that it has, they seek to profit from it or restrict it.

So whether you like Tweet Seats or not at arts events, whether you think anything of their sort is entertaining at sporting events, the intent of Global IP Law Group is to either “license this patent portfolio,” or shut down such uses, theatre by theatre, stadium by stadium, on behalf of their client. Through this patent, they would seek to monetize methods of communication that have already swept the world, albeit they seek to do so in a particular set of locations. They would charge a toll for free speech in theatres.

In the blog post I planned to write, I was going to discuss the fact that social media is extremely new, and that while it has gained staggering traction in a very short span of time (Facebook was only opened to the public in 2006; Twitter debuted even later), it is still in its infancy. A few decades from now, its integration into our lives, our entertainment, and perhaps even our art will be vastly more sophisticated; interactive media 2012 will look like radio in the 1920s or television in the 1940s. It is possible that our current resistance to social media as part of the live entertainment experience will give way to something less intrusive and more organic (if such a word can be applied to the meshing of the innately human performing arts and the fundamentally technological nature of electronic communication). But should we pay in order to explore that possibility?

The performing arts, largely because of their budgetary constraints, tend to not be early adopters of new technology. However, Twitter, Facebook, Pinterest and so many other resources are available for free (although one still must acquire a computer or smartphone and pay for internet access). But we make an easy target for claims such as those made in the name of U.S. Patent 6,975,878 because the arts do not have the ready resources to fight them individually or even necessarily together, and we are likelier to cease and desist than to challenge and persist, yet avoidance or capitulation would be unfortunate. We are lucky that this incursion on our efforts at creative communication encompasses professional sports, since that field has vastly deeper pockets, and may help to confront the concerns I’m spelling out. However, the Global IP Law Group asserts in a cover letter to their claim that several stadiums and arenas, including the Target Center, Xcel Energy Center and the Hubert Humphrey Metrodome have in fact licensed the technology from Inselberg; if this is verified, then we are already on a slippery slope.

It is unfortunate that this comes to light through experimentation with Tweet Seats, which at this point are far from widespread or de rigeur, but do evoke great passion from their detractors; many would be delighted to see them ended, but again, now is not the time to argue their effects (though I ask you to recall, if you can, the vehement response once upon a time to supertitles at the opera). If Tweet Seats are what alert us all to this wide-ranging patent which could close off a means of communicating with our audiences, of connecting with them in our theatres – perhaps even pre- and post-show and during intermission, which perhaps many would find less offensive  – then I urge everyone to fly the flag of Tweet Seats as a right and a choice, rather than a service we must license.

I have kept the confidence of the theatre that shared this information with me because, sensibly, they do not wish to further draw the attention of the Global IP Law Group.  But I have been able to show you the patent which is public record and, if you are a venue which has already been contacted, I am willing to be the conduit through which you may find others. If you have already held a Tweet Seats event, I certainly understand why you would not wish to alert the Global IP Law Group of your efforts, but perhaps you might use an intermediary to query the firm about its claims, on the grounds of considering Tweet Seats or some other interactive venture. But remember, Google is available to everyone. For free. So these firms may well find you anyway.  They’ll probably find this post within minutes of my publishing it. However, I have spoken with another theatre which held a Tweet Seats event, and they had not been contacted with this claim.

Many people abhor when material that is considered offensive is defended under the principle of free speech, but certainly the arts have had to stand for their rights when they present material which some might find objectionable. In this case, the specificity of the usage to be defended, Tweet Seats, might be seen in and of itself as impinging upon creative work, or disrupting the experience of performance, and therefore an offense. However, commercially restricting the practice does raise issues of free speech using common modes of communication. Whether or not we employ Tweet Seats or something akin to them is a choice every organization should be allowed to experiment with and make on its own, as we work to use the very newest technology to connect with our audiences, in our own venues, and to maintain awareness and enthusiasm for our work when so many other options beckon and so many creative – and perhaps generally palatable – uses of technology have yet to be conceived.

Addendum: Late in the day that this post first appeared, the theatre that went unnamed as the recipient of the claim against their use of Tweet Seats reconsidered their request for anonymity and chose to waive it. The theatre in question is Goodspeed Musicals in East Haddam CT, where I was general manager from 1994 to 1998, and intermittently serve as a consultant.

I always try to keep tabs on Broadway shows and the creative folks behind them on Twitter, so on Monday evening, I began following producer Eileen Rand and writer Julia Houston. On Tuesday morning, I noticed that Julia had followed me back and Eileen hadn’t, so I playfully tweeted that I liked Julia more. Well, Eileen saw that and, perhaps miffed, quickly followed me as well, tweeting that she appreciates what I do for the theatre community (whatever that may be).

A bit later in the day, I saw a tweet between the women, Eileen inviting Julia to meet her at Sarabeth’s, where she’d be all day. I then wrote to Eileen, saying I could be at that restaurant in minutes to speak with her about investing in Marilyn, her new show, but she begged off, contradicting her earlier tweet about hanging out for the afternoon, claiming she had to attend a performance by her niece at NYU. That’s when I knew something was up. Most producers would sell their nieces if it meant courting a potential investor.

No, I have not fallen and hit my head, projecting myself into a fantasy version of Smash. I’ve been on Twitter, where (presumably) the new Broadway-centered program has cleverly created personas for Eileen and Julia, as well as Tom Levitt and Ellis Boyd (so far). As a result, a TV program that already toys with the apparently permeable barrier between its fictional Broadway and the real thing (by casting true-life Rialto figures like producer Manny Azenberg and Jujamcyn Theatres honcho Jordan Roth) has taken a further step through the looking glass by offering fans a chance to have “real” conversations with the TV show’s characters. They’re not tweeting out explicit promos for the show; in fact I don’t recall having seen a single one. Instead, they’re interacting with each other – and seemingly with all who reach out to them – in what would so far seem to be a bit of inspired creativity from one or more knowing social media operatives. Time Out New York’s Adam Feldman has gotten into the spirit of things already: he’s expressed concern at possibly having given offense by slamming Tom and Julia’s hit musical Heaven on Earth as Heavin’ on Earth.

Certainly the Smash doppelgangers on Twitter aren’t the first fictional figures to appear on the platform. It’s awash in feeds from false versions of public figures to anthropomorphized commentary from fauna like the briefly missing Bronx Zoo Cobra or the ambitious, theatrically wise Central Park Raccoon, who as a habitué of the Delacorte, dreams of appearing more than just accidentally in Shakespeare one day (perhaps he should be auditioning for Marilyn instead). In fact, at a time when people wonder what will happen to Facebook pages and the like after their real world creators pass on, we can still find Lysistrata Jones chatting away on Twitter, apparently unaware that Clybourne Park is taking up residence where her basketball court once stood.

I’ve seen lots of discussion online about how theatre might take advantage of social media to extend the entertainment experience, as well as conversations about whether art could be created solely on social media. While it’s far too early to say whether Smash’s efforts will rise to art, they are certainly part of an extended improv that may well grow quite rich over time.  In fact, aside from the tweets, you can find “program bios” for all of the main characters on the Smash website. While they careen between amusingly fictional and patently false “real world” credits (the IBDB and these bios will be at eternal odds), the artifice only extends the concept – and we can all play along.

When I offered to meet Eileen yesterday, I didn’t really expect to find Anjelica Houston at the restaurant, although wouldn’t it have been amazing if I had? I even briefly worried about how I was dressed, as I wasn’t really prepared for meetings. But of course I was testing the tweeters behind the curtain to see how they’d respond, and while I caught them out, they’ve only had two days to work up their act. My main advice to them is to not create too elaborate a fantasy that they can’t make good on, and to remember the first rule of improv: never say ‘no.’

I am genuinely looking forward to more conversation with the characters of Smash online, just as I occasionally chat with some of the show’s creative artists in the same forum, notably writer Jason Grote and actor Brian D’Arcy James. The fact that I’ve never met the former, but chat cordially with the latter when we see each other, only adds to the meta-world that’s developing. After all, how do I know that Jason Grote really is a playwright named Jason Grote and, if he’s not who he says he is in the corporeal world, then who’s getting that writing credit and being interviewed by The Washington Post?

On Twitter, the line between real and imaginary is breaking down bit by bit (wouldn’t it be brilliant if Julia, Eileen and Tom all got “verified” as being who they claim to be; conversely, this is all vastly more labyrinthine if the tweeting characters aren’t via NBC, but are creative fans). So maybe by playing along, I’ll cross over from my theatrical world into theirs at some point, just like Manny and Jordan, occupying parallel worlds like my youthful science fiction heroes, even while I stay fully entrenched in the universe of theatre. My final word on the subject? Eileen/Anjelica/Theresa: call me! I’m waiting to get Smashed.

[Update: 2/8/12 at 2:45 pm Since I posted the above at 11:15 this morning, I have heard from Jason Grote, who informs me that he is in fact fictional. In addition, the character of Ivy Lynn has joined Twitter. Curiouser and curiouser.]

You use protection, you understand the dangers, but even a tiny pinprick can breach the most reliable barrier in this day and age. And once it’s out, there’s not a whole lot you can do about it, except ponder the consequences.

I am referring, of course, to information in our present day media saturated world, where Facebook has reduced the six degrees of separation theory to only 4.7 degrees, and where one tweet in a never-ending emission can, if it hits the right target, multiply and grow with unplanned repercussions. We are all progenitors of fact, and of gossip, and ironically, great success is now considered to be when said information goes viral, infecting as many as it can.

I’m torturing this metaphor at the moment because, over the past 12 hours or so, I have watched a simple bit of information, of relatively narrow interest, couple with some unintended partners. I’m not speaking of something salacious, some celebrity “sext,” but rather a humble casting notice.

Said notice was issued by a theatre, picked up by a popular website, where it was noticed by the playwright of the work being cast. He then tweeted his excitement, sharing the online article, where it attracted the attention not only of the publicist for said theatre – which had not yet announced the production in question – as well as the chief drama critic for the city’s major newspaper. Cat’s out of the bag, wouldn’t you say?

Based on the tweet trail surrounding this, everyone is taking it in the proper spirit: the critic doesn’t feel he was intentionally overlooked, the playwright realizes he might have kept his powder dry. The publicist may well be having a few words with the theatre’s artistic staff about the situation, but that would appear to be taking place offline.

I wrote six months ago about how the practice of press embargoes may be disintegrating, and scoops now are measured in minutes (via electronic media) as opposed to hourly or even daily news cycles. But in an age when everyone can be a broadcaster vis Facebook, Twitter, Tumblr and so on, the veil of privacy at any organization is perpetually at risk. Yes, employees can sign policy statements regarding their use of such media, but here’s a case where the initial release of information, thought to reach only a defined constituency, flashed quickly to other audiences, catching more than a few people by surprise.

An aside: on a few occasions in the past, I caused some of my fellow employees to be severely reprimanded by our bosses for speaking to a newspaper without my approval (such as the morning when a member of our artistic staff was on the front page of our major newspaper saying he’d rather wash his socks than watch the Super Bowl, a snobby statement I felt made us look elitist). Now the best I could hope for now would be to educate the staff about what they might be saying and when, rather than curtailing their media access for fear of jeopardizing their jobs.

Last night’s breach is certainly not the end of the world. Sustaining my motif, the information accidentally broadcast wasn’t news about an unwanted artistic baby, merely an early birth announcement. But it brings home the fact that control and timing, once so highly desired by organizations and hammered into their public representatives, will rarely remain under lock and key, no matter how hard we try. A drop of information, once released through any means and by anyone, can become a flood. Maybe we should just be happy that people care and that news of our work can still find welcoming homes.

P.S. Why have I been so coy about the plays and players herein? Because maybe you didn’t see the tweets I’ve mentioned, and I believe that ultimately, this is the organization’s news to share, not mine.

When reading aloud, for which this is meant,

Please keep in your mind that the @ is silent;

For names unfamiliar that cause you to think,

Fear not, as each one is a link.

To all real poets, I send utmost apol’gies

Most of all to R. Angell, king of this style of homilies.

*   *   *

In 2011, a year oh so sweet,

I truly engaged in the world of the tweet

For news and for humor, I must give my thanks

To at least some of the folks who fill out its ranks:

When I am in need of a funny retort,

I steal from the master @BorowitzReport.

For my twitter one liners I have gotten the hang,

From the comic machine, one @JohnFugelsang.

Sometimes I find that I laugh ‘til I cough

With rapid witticisms from wry @ditzkoff,

But when I want theatre news, then the best tweets to see,

Are those that are tagged @patrickhealynyt;

And @HellerNYT, please don’t critique my poor meter,

As I’ve struggled to name your gang at @nytimestheater.

All news from the Times may come out helter skelter,

But it’s diced, chopped and shortened by fine @BrianStelter;

West coast theatre news is most accurately sung,

In the tweets of @latimes editor, sharp lady @lfung.

Also in that direction, where the weather’s oft fair,

Come dispatches via @moorejohn and @JimHebert.

When it’s news of what’s up in my home state show biz,

I’ve only to turn to @joesview and @showriz.

As our twitter crowd gathers comes a pair of renown,

Please play for us @GeorgiaStitt and @MrJasonRBrown!

I promise that if you’ll just play the piano,

You’ll get zero guff from @ccaggiano.

Our joy and amusement will never be scanty,

Long as we see the work of Miss @laurabenanti.

Or who else to admire, well don’t you suppose,

That we’re just as enchanted by @anikanonirose?

And for late night odd tweets that have us gasping for breath,

Look only to the nocturnal @kchenoweth.

Rock, roll and showtunes surely deserve a hand

For that dynamo Alice and @RipleytheBand.

Among great musical stars, I count myself luckily

As one who can send a DM to @BettyBuckley.

For comic repartee, both swift and not mean,

Doff your cap to Spinal Tap’s great @mjmckean,

I envy him greatly at his end of the rainbow,

Nightly he goes home to kiss lovely gal @JimmyJindo.

For what I write here, I might land in hell,

When compared to the verse of Heights’ Lin_Manuel,

And while naming Tony winners is no longer my hobby,

I call out to another awards champ, @LopezBobby.

From theatre critics’ ranks, I’ll raise a loud shout,

To intrepid arts traveler Mr. @terryteachout.

Opinions? Time Out New York most certainly had ‘em,

With the sage @davidcote and the sharp @FeldmanAdam,

And out in Chicago theatre folks most aspire,

To praise from @ChrisJonesTrib and Time Out’s good @krisvire.

Sing ho, for @AP’s Mark @KennedyTwits,

And though not down with Twitter, the News’s Joe Dziemianowicz.

At the @wsj, there’s a big three-way tie:

Ellen Gamerman, @piacatton and new friend @barbarachai.

While our online debates devolve into “Yo Mama,”

I wish only the best to @petermarksdrama.

For Canadian news, I’ve had the good luck,

To meet @globeandmail’s intrepid Kelly @nestruck.

On drama thoughts British, he’s the West End’s accurate gauge,

The constantly flying scribe Mark @ShentonStage.

Other good English journos, I’ll serve pudding figgy

To The @Guardian’s @lyngardner and her colleague Ms. @chiggi.

Bloggers you shouldn’t miss and I often have thunk-a,

Read wise @parabasis and smart @Geohunka.

If you want your blog reads at a passionate pitch,

You need go no further than bold soul @clydefitch.

For countless articles, and blog posts, we surely all hail,

Encyclopedic digest-er Thomas — hey @youvecottmail!

For all of the satires that they have loosed,

Let’s laugh with the trio known as the @reduced,

And Shakespearean buffs cannot possibly shame me,

As I praise able Bard tender, one @ASC_Amy.

As @2amt grows to influence more,

We owe debt to its founder — nimble guy, that @dloehr.

While praising @2amt, I’d be called a phony

If I omit @travisbedard and @halcyontony.

Applaud @Pollykcarl and also @ddower,

Immersed in new plays that they want to see flower.

Say it’s social media you want to shmooze with,

See DC’s @allihouseworth and @devonvsmith.

Meet the folks behind ads, displays, flyers and hypes,

Here’s @trishamead, ol’ @chadbauman and skillful @spinstripes.

Bravely dipping toes into Twitter, he’s surely the one,

Stalwart Goodman head honcho @RobertFalls201.

While east coasters may think that she’s out in the sticks,

There’s wisdom to garner from @LindainPhoenix;

If you study in Boston, it’s Emerson’s plus,

To offer the classes of kind @JulieHennrikus.

Former colleagues of yore I praise with élan,

@Jcravens42 and fundraiser skilled @mcahalane.

Even anonymous tweeters I’ve goodwill allotted,

To @BroadwayGirlNYC and the sharp @BroadwaySpotted.

Because he’s so gracious, he won’t slander my rhymin’,

Cheers to even-toned theatre buff @nprscottsimon;

And I’ll happily share a most seasonal bagel

With playwright and radio host — wait wait, @PeterSagal!

Compared to most humans, we’re mired in sloth

When contrasted with Jujamcyn’s prez, @Jordan_Roth.

At @TectonicTheater there’s no manager finer,

Than skillful good-natured tweep, their @gregreiner.

You’re feeling parched? Let us drink some wassail

With @teresaeyring and @DERagsdale.

If you’ve known me for years this won’t come as a shocker

That I send holiday wishes to old friend @Kockenlocker.

Another longtime associate whose opinions I rate,

Is the veteran publicist @Bubbles2828;

Among new p.r. folk most particular fine,

I list @deniseschneider and @BrookeM1109.

Warm jacket and mittens I send @TDFNYC greeter,

The cheerful and inventive @EricaMTheatre.

At the @NewVictory, for your kids and you,

Works the good-humored @JamieNYC42.

‘Round restored @LincolnCenter these guys built a fine berth,

@SimsJames and Shakespearean @AWShuttleworth.

Though she’s mostly afar, on the dance floor I’d twirl

My Aussie companion, stalwart show gal @DramaGirl;

While we’re Down Under we’ll get our egg nog on,

For writers @elissablake and @alisoncroggon.

At this season of kindness I must also bless,

Humanist playwright @GwydionS;

To the convicts at Sing Sing @_PlainKate_ brings the art,

She’s admired by me and most astute @TheaterSmart.

There are so many playwrights whose debts we are in,

But I name only @kristofferdiaz and The New School’s @chris_shinn.

To past homes of employment highest praises I’ll sing:

@HartfordStage, @GoodspeedMusicl, @gevatheatre, @TheWing.

For those not found here, please don’t be offended,

Since holiday cheer’s what I fully intended,

It may be that your handle was too tough to rhyme,

Or that after much effort, I ran out of time.

To all who have patience with my obsession Twitter

I shower you all with confetti and glitter,

Here’s to the topics into which we will delve

In the next theater year, two thousand and twelve.

When you last saw Peter Marks and me, we were being thoughtful and playful on the stage of Arena’s Stage’s Kogod Cradle (you can watch here on New Play TV), as a result of the impromptu debates that sprang up between us over several months on Twitter. It was clear that there was an appetite for more conversation, and indeed some of our regular Twitter pals who attended the live event were frustrated that they couldn’t just interrupt us at will and, no doubt, might have preferred shorter answers. So Peter and I resolved to continue the conversation, but no longer by accident.  The following transcript is from the Twitter dialogue on December 7, our first since the November event at Arena. This conversation included more than two dozen active participants, as well as our invited “special guest” Robert Falls, artistic director of The Goodman Theater in Chicago, arelative newcomer to Twitter.

As before with these transcripts, they are reconstructed to the best of my ability, relying upon participants’ use of the #pmdhes hashtag for tracking. I have cleaned up some common Twitter abbreviations for ease of reading, but I was cautious about converting anything where I wasn’t absolutely sure about meaning; sticklers, as a result, will find some messages that exceed Twitter’s 140 character limit. Retweets of comments within the conversation have mostly been excised. Finally, the transcript is most expediently prepared in reverse chronological order, so you’re advised to jump to the end of this post and then scroll upward for proper continuity.

*   *   *

Chadbauman 3:42pm  Similarly, Rick Lester from @trgarts likes to say that prayer shouldn’t be a marketing strategy.

Danfrmbourque 3:41pm  @productionkat I know. They love to retweet you and send out press release stuff, but not much real interaction. Thus I follow few.

Chadbauman 3:40pm   A takeaway from the event was @petermarksdrama saying if your business model is based on good reviews, you’re in trouble.

Productionkat 3:38pm   @Danfrmbourque I have been suprized at how little theatre do tweet to promote or answer questions

Danfrmbourque 3:36pm  @Chadbauman curious as I’ve had theatres tweet at me days after I had mentioned them; a bit funny, like they are in a time warp!

Chadbauman 3:34pm  @Danfrmbourque We try our best to be continually staffed, but sometimes that is impossible.

Danfrmbourque 3:32pm  @Chadbauman Chad, how regularly is Arena twitter account “Staffed”? Some theatres seem to have accounts live a few hours at a time.

RSTStatusReport 3:32pm  @Dloehr And the Tony goes to ………”Bathroom Espionage Stories!”

Petermarksdrama 3:31pm  I love what @Klange has gleaned about reviews. And thanks to @Bankyhimself for the hashtag reminder! Can trample my lawn anytime.

Chadbauman 3:31pm  @HESherman @RobertFalls201 @petermarksdrama great discussion today guys. Glad I could participate. Thanks for pulling it together!

HESherman 3:31pm   @rosalind1600  #pmdhes is PeterMarksDrama & HESherman, since this all started as online debates between us.

HESherman 3:30pm   @rststatusreport You’re as young as you tweet!

Dloehr 3:30pm   @RSTStatusReport @HESherman The phrase “bathroom espionage stories” alone was worth the price of admission.

HESherman 3:29pm   @Chadbauman And in some cases, during.

Chadbauman 3:29pm  @HESherman Much easier these days. They’ll tell us on Twitter what they think minutes after a performance.

HESherman 3:28pm   @petermarksdrama And the ones who retweet fans messages from people who just want to be retweeted by a celeb.

RSTStatusReport 3:28pm  @HESherman I bet there are some good bathroom espionage stories. DO TELL.

Dloehr 3:28pm   @RobertFalls201 That #blatantpromotion was with a wink, yes?

HESherman 3:27pm   I’m going to sign off. Feel free to keep talking and use #pmdhes, as I’ll create a transcript of all messages with it from this afternoon.

RobertFalls201 3:27pm  @HESherman This has been great & int, this new world. Tx 4 questions, comments, confusion. Go see #RED @arenastage #blatantpromotion

Klange 3:27pm  @HESherman @RobertFalls201 @petermarksdrama Thanks to all of you!

RSTStatusReport 3:27pm  @Chadbauman The fact that I first read “SM” as Stage Manager and not Social Media might be a sign that I’m getting old.

Petermarksdrama 3:26pm  @HESherman I also dislike proselytizing celebs who hammer daily at the same political causes. Gotta turn down the volume

HESherman 3:26pm   @Chadbauman I remember when I had to send spies into the ladies restroom to listen to conversations to judge reactions. Old times.

SMLois 3:26pm   @HESherman @robertfalls201 @petermarksdrama thank you guys for engaging in the conversation.

Walt828 3:26pm   @asc_amy: @robertfalls201 Of course. Doesn’t alter the case: 55% of grant funding goes to top 2% of NPOs.

Dloehr 3:25pm   @HESherman @RobertFalls201 @petermarksdrama Let’s all do this again sometime. 😉

ASC_Amy 3:25pm   @HESherman Thanks for organizing it!

Edenlane 3:25pm   Usually my plan too… unless featuring an interview RT @HESherman: @smlois I discuss what I’m going 2 c, not my post-show opinion.

Jfdubiner 3:25pm  @Dloehr @ASC_Amy @LindaInPhoenix Me too – expansive opps for communicating dif ideas about same content to dif auds.

Productionkat 3:25pm   BRAVO! RT @ASC_Amy: @Walt828 @robertfalls201 We covered 96% of our expenses in October with earned income.

Chadbauman 3:25pm  @HESherman I can tell how a show is being received in part these days by SM responses in previews.

HESherman 3:25pm   I think we’re slowing down. B4 all fall away, thanks to all of you, and especially @RobertFalls201 for joining the fun.

ASC_Amy 3:25pm   @Walt828 @robertfalls201 But if there is one, there are very possibly more & it proves other models are possible.

Dloehr 3:25pm   @PirateQueenKate Indeed. I’m actually drafting a post about OccupyDowerApt.

Walt828 3:24pm   @asc_amy @robertfalls201 One outlier doesn’t undermine the argument.

Productionkat 3:24pm   I found it to b a great 1st connection then larger donation @Klange: @RobertFalls201 @productionkat @HESherman @GoodmanTheatre

PirateQueenKate 3:24pm  @Dloehr See my #WDW2011 epic story of Washer/Dryer installation. Danger. Drama. Heartbreak.

HESherman 3:24pm   @petermarksdrama Andy Borowitz, John Fugelsang and Albert Brooks are worth a follow.

Klange 3:23pm     @RobertFalls201 We are nothing if not trailblazers.

Dloehr 3:23pm   @Jfdubiner @ASC_Amy @LindaInPhoenix What really intrigues me is the idea of telling a story that spans all of those forms…

SMLois 3:23pm   @HESherman I try to mention most of what I attend before I see it, but if I love it I promote. I never publicly criticize.

HESherman 3:23pm   @Chadbauman Twitter is simply the tech amplification of word of mouth. A media for the masses (vs. mass media).

Walt828 3:23pm   True. Does it have to be 100%? RT @asc_amy @robertfalls201 I’m not going to repeat our earlier “discussion,” but that isn’t the case

Danfrmbourque 3:23pm  @SMLois @Klange If I see a show I usually mention it, every little bit helps. If I really hate something I’m not likely to though

Petermarksdrama 3:22pm  @HESherman To answer your question: I followed a lot of well known comedians etc. But a lot of them perform on here. Doesn’t do it for me

SMLois 3:22pm   @RobertFalls201 @Chadbauman I suppose it depends on the reviewer. From some a positive review is gold. Others just don’t matter.

ASC_Amy 3:22pm   @Walt828 @robertfalls201 We covered 96% of our expenses in October with earned income.

HESherman 3:22pm   @smlois I discuss what I’m going 2 c, not my post-show opinion. More interested in promoting theatre than critiquing it publicly.

Chadbauman 3:22pm  @RobertFalls201 @SMLois @Klange we’ve had shows get negative reviews and do quite well because of positive word of mouth.

Walt828 3:21pm   @robertfalls201 Seems like Baumol and Bowen gave a license.

ASC_Amy 3:21pm   @Walt828 @robertfalls201 I’m not going to repeat our earlier “discussion,” but that isn’t the case everywhere.

HESherman 3:21pm   @Klange There’s great similarity.

Walt828 3:20pm   @robertfalls201 Seems as if the nonprofit model is built on ever-increasing unearned income. Wasn’t always like that, says Ziegler.

Klange 3:20pm  @Chadbauman @SMLois right! Cuz, ideally, each aud member has a unique experience across a broad range of tastes. Like attracts like

Dloehr 3:20pm   @PirateQueenKate @LindaInPhoenix Different types of stories, to be sure, but a fun challenge nonetheless.

Dloehr 3:19pm   @PirateQueenKate @LindaInPhoenix It also allows for fun storytelling–I’ve done it with plays, I’m doing it with #celebbowling.

Klange 3:19pm  @SMLois oh, of course not. You act as a curator – not just a mindless booster.

HESherman 3:19pm   @lindainphoenix Yes! I can ramble on in my blog posts, and I do. Here it’s about focus and brevity. Headlines, essentially.

Jfdubiner 3:19pm  @ASC_Amy @LindaInPhoenix @Dloehr Interesting how forms is defining function as there are more forms – fb, tw, blog, tmblr etc.

Dloehr 3:19pm   @HESherman @robertfalls201 Ben has an account, and we joked about it in January. I’d love for him to join in.

JaysenElsky 3:19pm  @HESherman Well, I am a youngin, so it really is an exercise. But it came from a real conversation. and, I agree with your hope

Geohunka 3:19pm  @HESherman  But that’s true of any form of communication. Besides, similarly, you only hear what people want to tell you.

PirateQueenKate 3:18pm  @LindaInPhoenix @Dloehr brevity forces clarity. You can’t couch weak ideas in flowery language and obfuscate. short, sweet, simple.

Chadbauman 3:18pm  @SMLois @Klange Nothing replaces word of mouth. I’ll take positive word of mouth over neg reviews any day. Trick is to get both.

HESherman 3:18pm   @petermarksdrama Yet your corporate overlords would be so proud of you.

Klange 3:18pm  @HESherman @robertfalls201 Maybe that’s where #OWS got the idea for the “human microphone.” 😉

Productionkat 3:18pm   I look at everyone as potential funders too-

RobertFalls201 3:18pm  @Walt828 I hear you and understand. These are issues we’re all grappling with. Large or small, we all need funding.

Klange 3:17pm  @RobertFalls201 @productionkat @HESherman @GoodmanTheatre It’s mostly people we met here. Tighter #DCTheatre community sprung up

SMLois 3:17pm   @Klange but I’m not going to promote all 150+ shows I see each year.

Dloehr 3:17pm   @LindaInPhoenix Exactly. I’m just responding to the idea that these 140 char posts exist independent of any context.

LindaInPhoenix 3:16pm  Funny this hit my feed during convo on social media Answers to 31 Social Media Questions You’re Too Shy to Ask

ASC_Amy 3:16pm   @LindaInPhoenix @Dloehr Indeed, for more in-depth you can always spill into a blog post.

SMLois 3:16pm   @Klange agreed. When I love a show I’m thrilled to talk about it. And I’m picky, so my opinion has some weight locally.

HESherman 3:16pm   @robertfalls201 Maybe 600 followers, but message can be RT’d and amplified many times. You never know what captures attention.

LindaInPhoenix 3:15pm   @Dloehr Actually, I think the 140 character thing is

RobertFalls201 3:15pm  @HESherman Sure. Beats working.

HESherman 3:15pm   @geohunka Over time, its sort of remarkable, depending on how much you wish to say publicly.

Petermarksdrama 3:15pm  @HESherman I was shilling with a wink.

Petermarksdrama 3:14pm  @Walt828 I so agree. And you gotta listen to what people are saying.

HESherman 3:14pm   I’d promised @RobertFalls201 a 45 minute conversation. Please stay if you can Bob, but no one will think ill if u must bow out.

Klange 3:14pm  @SMLois @petermarksdrama @hesherman I think it’s incredibly important to support other work, too. Word of mouth for plays, etc.

Chadbauman 3:14pm  @RobertFalls201 We are putting much more effort into building our own communications infrastructure as well.

RobertFalls201 3:14pm  @Klange @productionkat @HESherman I find that so interesting. No funders that I’m aware of at any level following me @GoodmanTheatre

Walt828 3:14pm   @robertfalls201  A recent report shows a huge income gap between rich NPO’s and the rest: top 2% get 55% of grant income. Is this fair?

Dloehr 3:14pm   Enough with the 140 character thing. It’s the accumulation of conversation that reveals who we are, as with any other medium.

ASC_Amy 3:13pm   @geohunka You can reveal your point of view quite easily. Honesty in convo = transparency.

Playwrightsteve 3:13pm   @HESherman @Walt828 Control usually equals canned PR messages. But Twitter is best used as a dialogue. Much less control there.

Dloehr 3:13pm   @RobertFalls201 People can also follow you on Twitter lists without officially following you, so it may be more people than that.

NicolesNotes 3 :13pm  @Walt828 I agree. It’s quite likely that this is why so many companies remain ineffective. There should be format, but flexibility.

HESherman 3:13pm   @petermarksdrama Now you’re just shilling. Doesn’t become you.

Petermarksdrama 3:12pm  @ddower Critics are assumed to be this, that, other thing. But we’re really just like Soylent Green. Believe it or not, we’re PEOPLE.

HESherman 3:12pm   @Walt828 One can control their own message, but not the flow of communication.

Dloehr 3:12pm   @HESherman @petermarksdrama Beeber. (sic)

Klange 3:12pm  @productionkat @HESherman @robertfalls201 We reach a lot of small funders aka followers, but we’re tiny. Haven’t noticed big funders

ASC_Amy 3:12pm   @RobertFalls201 I think it has grown in the past hour.

Geohunka 3:12pm  How much can you meaningfully reveal in 140 chars? Camaraderie is not transparency

RobertFalls201 3:12pm  Not sure what 2 make of having a reg aud of 20K 2 communicate w as a dir but putting lots of energy into comm w/600. (or is it more)

Dloehr 3:12pm   @TheTicketMaven If it’s “usually promo 4 org,” I’d say it’s being done wrong. Without engagement, there’s little point in following.

HESherman 3:11pm   @petermarksdrama What celebs WERE you following? Do tell! Inquiring minds want to know!

SMLois 3:11pm   @petermarksdrama @hesherman I’ve also stopped following anyone who only pushes their own work and doesn’t converse.

Petermarksdrama 3:11pm  @HESherman Yup. Post remains smart, informative, sophisticated, utterly indispensable news source!

ASC_Amy 3:11pm   @TheTicketMaven Actually only about 30% of my time on Twitter is promo for my org.

Walt828 3:10pm   Seems to me that to participate in Twitter you have to be willing to reveal. If you want to control the message, it won’t work.

RobertFalls201 3:10pm  @petermarksdrama @HESherman @jenniferehle Depends on the celeb. I find it interesting to get to know them without PR protection shield.

HESherman 3:10pm   @danfrmbourque Yes, comments devoid of context can be tricky. Also sort of amazed by folks making off-color jokes here.

TheTicketMaven 3:10pm   So social media is two-fold…usually promo for org but growth for the employee participating.

Dloehr 3:10pm   @BankyHimself #tiggerbounce #snoopydancing

ASC_Amy 3:10pm   @RSTStatusReport @JaysenElsky @Dloehr Indeed. *digs in heels at Shakespeare theatre*

Dloehr 3:09pm   @JaysenElsky Probably not. There’s always room for verbosity, or for a Mametian scene of nothing but one to two words back & forth.

RSTStatusReport 3:09pm  @JaysenElsky @Dloehr Gosh, I hope not. I’d like to think there’s still a place in the world for flowery language.

HESherman 3:09pm   @jaysenelsky Seems like a formal exercise to me. But IMHO, fad, not future (I hope).

Petermarksdrama 3:09pm  @HESherman I’ve stopped following all celebs/famous actors (except @jenniferehle because she’s so charming) don’t learn anything

Danfrmbourque 3:08pm  Twitter can be intimidating because so little room for context, Always careful when replying to those I don’t know because of that

Ddower 3:08pm  @HESherman I’ve learned a lot from watching what you’re learning, @petermarksdrama. Bunches about what we assume critics know/feel.

Dloehr 3:08pm   @HESherman @morydd The real trick is focus. The     is well-focused because of time. The #2amt stream is more freeform & always on.

Productionkat 3:07pm   We have done twitter fundraisers! 🙂 RT @HESherman: @robertfalls201 Have you found any funders who are actually engaging on Twitter?

HESherman 3:07pm   @petermarksdrama U still have vast audience if using print. Unless u say something inflammatory online, @washingtonpost best soapbox

Petermarksdrama 3:07pm  @HESherman @robertfalls201 I’ve found it wildly useful for background, for trends, for shows+writers I didn’t know about

BankyHimself 3:07pm  As someone who’s hung with @Dloehr in person, I’ll attest to his real-life “bounciness.”

Dloehr 3:07pm   @ASC_Amy @morydd It’s easy to be overwhelmed by the stream. That’s why the #2amt site’s there, to distill or spark conversation.

JaysenElsky 3:07pm  @Dloehr On true intimacy in 140 characters. Funny. working on a one act with dialogue entirely in 1-2 words. The future?

RobertFalls201 3:06pm  @petermarksdrama Yes! (Point proven.)

HESherman 3:06pm   @morydd I’ve used the firehose analogy as well. And this sort of Twitter gang conversation can be even trickier.

BankyHimself 3:06pm  Do these great minds sit around all day and think about theatre? No, sometimes they’re on the couch watching Breaking Bad too.

MariselaTOrta 3:06pm  @JaysenElsky @HESherman @robertfalls201 Listening aka lurking is also 1st level of engagement. Participating will likely follow

Petermarksdrama 3:05pm  @SMLois I see.

BankyHimself 3:05pm  Getting 2 know the person-side @RobertFalls201 who’s work I’ve studied/d admired , has helped encourage me as a young artist.

HESherman 3:05pm   @robertfalls201 @petermarksdrama Yet Peter says he has new perceptions from Twitter. If participation adds value with critics…

Klange 3:05pm  @Dloehr @petermarksdrama I can attest to that.

Petermarksdrama 3:04pm  @RobertFalls201 I’ve been told by PR people who advise, don’t respond to a critic, cause they have last word! (Not true anymore!)

Michaeldove 3:04pm   @HESherman Opening up the process and sharing the experience is so key to Forum. Can’t think of it any other way-just feels natural

ASC_Amy 3:04pm   @morydd I sometimes have to take 15 minute “twitter breaks” from my regular work, with timer and everything.

SMLois 3:04pm   @petermarksdrama don’t want any revelations of behind the scenes activity or anything implying I’d work on days off

Dloehr 3:04pm   @petermarksdrama But in person, I’m very much the same as here–bouncy, usually ready with a joke, ready to engage.

HESherman 3:04pm   @asc_amy Focus groups can be misleading in many cases, but absolutely, the self-selection of SM holds perils

JaysenElsky 3:04pm  @HESherman @robertfalls201 I think people lurk because they are afraid they have nothing to add

Morydd 3:03pm  @HESherman I also find following the #2amt much like drinking from a firehose. Hard to stay on top of convo and get other work done.

Dloehr 3:03pm   @mlaffs Man’s a good hugger, what can I say?

HESherman 3:03pm   @robertfalls201 I RT’d stories re MOTHER WITH THE HAT in Hartford, but didn’t offer personal comment due to possible perception of conflict of interest

ASC_Amy 3:03pm   @LindaInPhoenix @HESherman *zing*

Dloehr 3:03pm   @petermarksdrama …explain why I’d be vanishing for a few days in October.

Mlaffs 3:02pm   @Dloehr that bromance with @travisbedard is legen- *and i hope you’re not lactose intolerant* -dairy

LindaInPhoenix 3:02pm   @HESherman Maybe when I teach arts management next year…

Dloehr 3:02pm   @petermarksdrama …there’s a lot I don’t share. I kept very quiet about my mother this fall, for instance, only blogging to…

RobertFalls201 3:02pm  @petermarksdrama @HESherman @HESherman MORE?? No. I have enough critics in my life!

Petermarksdrama 3:02pm  @SMLois @HESherman @michaeldove Lois, what is the distinction? Why some ask you to stop?

Dloehr 3:02pm   @petermarksdrama Indeed. And I’ll admit, there are certain aspects I highlight, others I downplay. As open & silly as I am here…

Petermarksdrama 3:01pm  @seanjbryan @HESherman Amazing statistic

HESherman 3:01pm   @lindainphoenix Gee, you didn’t call me! (harumph, unfollow button)  😉

ASC_Amy 3:01pm   @HESherman You have a very self-selected focus group on social media, have to be careful of drawing conclusions.

Petermarksdrama 3:01pm  @Dloehr It’s extraordinary how much you DO get the essence of the person on twitter. Also, we all start w/common habit

ASC_Amy 3:00pm   @TheTicketMaven Yes, only about 5% of my interaction is with our patrons.

RobertFalls201 3:00pm  @morydd @HESherman V true. I follow discussions re: MOTHER WITH THE HAT, tweeting in theaters, etc etc, but have nothing to say to jump in

RSTStatusReport 3:00pm  @playwrightsteve Exactly. Also good way to make connections. I’ve met several playwrights through Twitter conversations.

Seanjbryan 3:00pm   @HESherman @petermarksdrama 98% of the people I know in the US I met through an online platform of some kind

HESherman 3:00pm   @RobertFalls201 Are there things you would like to learn from people via social media, as opposed to audience surveys?

TheTicketMaven 3:00pm   Many want the convo to be with the patron and that isn’t always the case.

Petermarksdrama 3:00pm  @HESherman @RobertFalls201 Bob, do you have a desire for more contact with critics??? Or is that secondary?

Mlaffs 2:59pm   @HESherman @ASC_Amy some folks are unable to think big and grasp implications of the nebulous internet

LindaInPhoenix 2:59pm   (it helped that social media was a topic)

Mlaffs 2:59pm   @HESherman @ASC_Amy @LindaInPhoenix i think case studies/ROI helps focus the convo to concrete benefit to org.

LindaInPhoenix 2:59pm   Half our speakers series this year was built on connections made initially via twitter

Michaeldove 2:59pm   @MariselaTOrta @hesherman And did you get any pushback on that?

HESherman 2:58pm   @morydd Didn’t mean to suggest all lurkers are reticent. You point is well taken. See, danger of very brief statements!

ASC_Amy 2:58pm   @playwrightsteve the @pewresearch folks have found the same thing in their studies.

Mlaffs 2:58pm   @HESherman @ASC_Amy good points, but convincing technophobes brings up the question of Return on Investment. I use case studies & consumer data

Petermarksdrama 2:58pm  @Dloehr @Klange @ASC_Amy I don’t pretend that we’re 1 big happy fam. But hearing voices as passionate about theatre as mine helps in job

Dloehr 2:58pm   @ASC_Amy @petermarksdrama Like with us, for example. 🙂

Playwrightsteve 2:58pm   Doesn’t decrease human interaction. Social media helps me keep contact w/ people with whom I otherwise would have NO contact

PirateQueenKate 2:58pm  @playwrightsteve & @ASC_Amy JINX!!! cc: @petermarksdrama @Dloehr

Dloehr 2:58pm   @petermarksdrama But meeting in person? All the awkward getting-to-know-you-ness drops away. Never ceases to amaze me.

HESherman 2:58pm   I have made more new real-world friends via social media of late than through just “meeting” people. Just had lunch with @nestruck.

GwydionS 2:58pm   @asc_amy @Dloehr I would never have met either of you without Twitter.

Ddower 2:57pm  MT @HESherman Yes. Our communication department @arenastage created it. But atop that you also have the Institute, with different rules of engagement.

SMLois 2:57pm   @HESherman @michaeldove I’ve had companies ask me to stop tweeting about our work while others pay me extra to run their account

MariselaTOrta 2:57pm  @HESherman @michaeldove “no social media” in artist contract–I blog my writing process. That wldn’t work for me

Dloehr 2:57pm   @petermarksdrama Amen. I’ve never seen it as a replacement for human interaction, which is the other criticism I’ve heard.

ASC_Amy 2:57pm   @HESherman @mlaffs an interesting blog re: the ROI of Social Media

PirateQueenKate 2:57pm  @Dloehr @Klange @ASC_Amy @petermarksdrama Lunch = Oyamel #NOMS

Playwrightsteve 2:57pm   @ASC_Amy Okay. So, we shared a brain just then.

Ddower 2:57pm  Interesting discussion at #pmdhes re: critics, artists, and Twitter. Join in now, or read and respond later.

Playwrightsteve 2:56pm   @petermarksdrama @Dloehr And Twitter leads to opportunities for 1-on-1 face time that would not have occurred otherwise

ASC_Amy 2:56pm   @petermarksdrama @Dloehr Twitter has actually increased my one-to-one face time with folks I wouldn’t otherwise have met.

HESherman 2:56pm   @mlaffs Is ROI the be all and end all? Isn’t a great deal of the benefit qualitative, not quantitative?

Morydd 2:56pm  @HESherman Not all lurkers are afraid of the interaction. I don’t join into every conversation I listen to in real life either.

Petermarksdrama 2:56pm  @Dloehr agreed–it’s not perfect, and not really a sub for one-to-one face time. But ppl who poopoo it usually don’t try to do it

HESherman 2:55pm   @Chadbauman Have @arenastage social media policies had to evolve as mass acceptance of form has grown so rapidly?

Jfdubiner 2:55pm  @HESherman That’s a hard pill for an old #dramaturg to swallow…

Dloehr 2:55pm   @petermarksdrama @Klange @ASC_Amy My wife was dubious until she saw how much fun I was having with @travisbedard & his ilk.

Michaeldove 2:55pm   @HESherman No mentioning of the show, that is, good or bad.

SMLois 2:55pm   @Dloehr @petermarksdrama which is why it has to be a conversation.

RobertFalls201 2:55pm  Yes. I think there is a danger of too much Twitter. Distracts f/the silence I need as an artist vs. noise I require as a producer

HESherman 2:54pm   @michaeldove ‘No social media’ in artist contracts sounds like a 1st amendment violation to me. Likely unenforceable.

Dloehr 2:54pm   @Klange @ASC_Amy @petermarksdrama What’d y’all have for lunch? (ducks from the brickbats)

Chadbauman 2:54pm  @HESherman @ddower Arena adopted social media guidelines in 2009.

Mlaffs 2:54pm   @Dloehr @petermarksdrama also arts orgs are overworked – they see it as *another* time-suck/commitment/resource-stretcher

Klange 2:54pm  @petermarksdrama @ASC_Amy Lol. It does take time, but the convo here has definitely led to increased collaboration in #dcTheatre

Petermarksdrama 2:54pm  @RobertFalls201 It’s easier transaction with you Bob because I admire your work. But as you said in an early tweet, you’re a “big boy” – I think so am I

Playwrightsteve 2:54pm   @Dloehr @petermarksdrama What is the character threshold on “true intimacy” anyway?

Dloehr 2:54pm   @petermarksdrama And my answer is, it’s not possible in a single face-to-face sentence, either.

HESherman 2:53pm   I remain amazed I’m so fluent on twitter. As I often joke, in person I have trouble says ‘hello’ in 140 characters.

Dloehr 2:53pm   @petermarksdrama I’ve gotten the “true intimacy isn’t possible in 140 chars” line before from people who don’t like twitter.

Mlaffs 2:53pm   @ASC_Amy @SMLois @petermarksdrama i’ve made a point of speaking 2 ROI & strategy to help people understand how it can be a benefit

ASC_Amy 2:53pm   @michaeldove I posted them on my blog (pls ignore the time lapse since my last post)

HESherman 2:53pm   @Jfdubiner Accepting that bad grammar & punctuation is OK, boiling thoughts down to briefest essence is new way to think

LindaInPhoenix 2:53pm   thought it would be a great way to interact w/ students, but only a handful follow.

Danfrmbourque 2:52pm  Twitter really breaks down walls between artists and critics. Casual, deceptively simple it encourages small talk and then bigger

Petermarksdrama 2:52pm  @Klange @ASC_Amy My wife says “You’re twittering your life away.” Makes me feel guilty!

SMLois 2:52pm   @petermarksdrama @asc_amy and the meaty discussion tends to come from the same small percentage of users

Dloehr 2:52pm   @petermarksdrama I think people are afraid also because they don’t realize how much like regular conversation it is.

HESherman 2:52pm   @ddower Is there a social media policy in place @arenastage regarding content? Who created it?

Jfdubiner 2:52pm  @RSTStatusReport @petermarksdrama Is that still true? Or is it hard to bend old ideas of community engagement to new definition of comm?

Ddower 2:52pm  One of fastest changes underway in this sector is the move from controlled messaging/access to transparency. Twitter works there.

Petermarksdrama 2:52pm  @RSTStatusReport I think that’s very true

RobertFalls201 2:52pm  @petermarksdrama Interesting. Some critics want NO contact with people they’re reviewing; does having this contact compromise or assist?

HESherman 2:51pm   @theticketmaven But that’s fine. You’re interested. Maybe you’ll join in, if not today, another time.

Michaeldove  2:51pm   @ASC_Amy @ddower @robertfalls201 @hesherman @shakespearectr What kind of guidelines, if you can share?

Klange 2:51pm  @ASC_Amy @petermarksdrama Many view it as trifling chats on reality TV/sports/whatever. I know it to be a place for real connection

Petermarksdrama 2:51pm  @ASC_Amy @SMLois It is a time-suck, no doubt. + I find the meaty discussion crowds out the promotion, so u have to wanna TALK

Dloehr 2:51pm   @Jfdubiner @petermarksdrama It’s almost like a haiku.

HESherman 2:51pm   @robertfalls201 Absolutely people lurk, but term is pejorative. Many not bold enough to engage with strong personalities at times.

TheTicketMaven 2:50pm   @RobertFalls201 I’m lurking right now

ASC_Amy 2:50pm   @ddower @RobertFalls201 @HESherman Indeed. It took official social media guidelines to get everyone at @shakespearectr comfortable.

RSTStatusReport 2:50pm  @petermarksdrama Maybe some folks feel more comfortable in a bubble? Engagement with larger community could shatter preconceptions.

HESherman 2:50pm   @robertfalls201 I refer to social media as the earliest days of radio or TV. Still so new. Constantly evolving.

Ddower 2:50pm  @RobertFalls201 @HESherman And it takes courage for an institution to allow the individual voice. So staffers, like me, walk a line.

Jfdubiner 2:49pm  @petermarksdrama As someone new to twittering, the form itself is hard. Like being a transfer student in a foreign language.

Dloehr 2:49pm   @petermarksdrama This is after taking me to the airport, asking, “Why are you going to DC? Arena Stage invited you to what? Why?”

HESherman 2:49pm   @petermarksdrama Yet its a subset of theatre folks who a) are on social media and b) who you choose to “hear.” Not general public.

Dloehr 2:49pm   @petermarksdrama Took two years and the wave of 2amt to get my AD on here, since he realized he should see what I was doing.

RobertFalls201 2:49pm  @petermarksdrama I have more than 600 followers BUT only interact w/5%. Think most people are “lurkers” and afraid 2 participate.

SMLois 2:48pm   @petermarksdrama many companies I work with see twitter as waste of time with no clear Return on Investment

ASC_Amy 2:48pm   @petermarksdrama Everyone I talk to fear the possible time suck, don’t understand the possibilities.

Petermarksdrama 2:48pm  @RobertFalls201 Your passion comes thru. Our engagement is esp interesting, Bob, ’cause I’m going 2 see your work in DC soon.

Edenlane 2:48pm   @HESherman Funders / Underwriters are asking about all of our social media presence to measure the reach of their support

RobertFalls201 2:48pm  @HESherman It all feels a bit like the Wild West. Uncharted.

HESherman 2:48pm   @brookem1109 Brooke, Brooke, Brooke. Priorities, young lady, priorities. But I guess getting @petermarksdrama good seat is vital.

Petermarksdrama 2:47pm  My question is, what limits Twitter in many theatre people’s minds? Why aren’t they flooding the platform?

Klange 2:47pm  @petermarksdrama @ASC_Amy @PirateQueenKate Thank you! I can only strive to get better & take what I can from each piece of feedback

HESherman 2:47pm   @lindainphoenix So many people assume retweets or “curated” content is something you agree with; don’t get it may b just for convo

ASC_Amy 2:47pm   @HESherman I’ve seen funders in other nonprofit areas mostly. Although a couple arts funders out of Chicago.

RobertFalls201 2:46pm  In my profile, I say I’m intensely political & have no fear of exposing opinions. Want to opine re: arts, politics, pop culture…

HESherman 2:46pm   @robertfalls201 Have you found any funders who are actually engaging on Twitter? Maybe that’s the next piece of the puzzle.

Petermarksdrama 2:46pm  @Klange @ASC_Amy @PirateQueenKate Karen, Your responses to the post review on here were smart, not emotional.

ASC_Amy 2:46pm   @HESherman @moorejohn I first really engaged with Twitter during my two months of unemployment. Huge to have a community.

BrookeM1109 2:45pm  Want to follow convo but must finish press night seating #Tessitorture #Procrastination

Dloehr 2:45pm   @RobertFalls201 @HESherman In the past, I’ve compared it to a global MST3K experience and/or a virtual Algonquin Round Table.

HESherman 2:45pm   @moorejohn As someone who’s consulting and doesn’t have regular daily gig, Twitter keeps me engaged with theatre community

PirateQueenKate 2:45pm  @ASC_Amy @petermarksdrama Yes, the theater wasn’t willing to admit shows were weak, easier to ban reviews from green room.

Petermarksdrama 2:44pm  @Jfdubiner @moorejohn for me, absolutely. I have far more context about what audiences and theater folks are interested in

Dloehr 2:44pm   @HESherman Indeed. Hopefully we can act as a gateway for them. (I’ll happily recreate Bob & Ray routines at the drop of a hat.)

HESherman 2:44pm   @robertfalls201 At the same time, I feel like I’m playing to an audience at times, with hashtag games and blog promos

ASC_Amy 2:44pm   @Klange Indeed. Have faith in your vision and acknowledge there are different tastes/perspectives.

RobertFalls201 2:43pm  @HESherman I agree & have come 2 learn that. Always a line 2 walk b/c institution = critics, funders, auds.

Rosalind1600 2:43pm  @Jfdubiner @HESherman @petermarksdrama But agree with Peter Marks on no politics. Plenty of other venues for that — like work.

HESherman 2:43pm   @robertfalls201 To me, it’s like having a whole bunch of pen pals all at once, with instantaneous response

Klange 2:43pm  @ASC_Amy @petermarksdrama @PirateQueenKate Or see one bad review as a referendum on your project/worth. One has to get past that

Rosalind1600 2:43pm  @Jfdubiner @HESherman @petermarksdrama I don’t mind talking only about theater. But other arts/culture interesting to discuss too.

LindaInPhoenix 2:43pm   @ASC_Amy @petermarksdrama I’m in a similar boat re political comments, but am comfortable posting political content w/o comment

HESherman 2:42pm   @Dloehr Yet we talk about Tom Lehrer and Bob & Ray, and probably lots of our followers have no frame of reference

HESherman 2:42pm   @petermarksdrama Save for weighing in on current #GOPmuppethearings, I am apolitical on social media, except for arts policy

Jfdubiner 2:42pm  @moorejohn @petermarksdrama Has getting to know audience/artists changed the way you write about the work?

ASC_Amy 2:42pm   @petermarksdrama @PirateQueenKate I see it happen when folks don’t take control of their own destinies and blame others for failures

Moorejohn 2:42pm  @HESherman Honestly it’s so raw, I haven’t wrapped my head around that it’s over. I took the buyout and had to be gone in 24 hours

SMLois 2:41pm   @petermarksdrama @hesherman @robertfalls201don I know some critics who feel it is a conflict of interests to get to know artists.

RobertFalls201 2:41pm  @HESherman @petermarksdrama One does form common community w Twitter…find people around you with shared interests include info AND entertainment value

Petermarksdrama 2:40pm  @PirateQueenKate Fascinating to hear theaters “demonize” critics. What the heck is that about?

Edenlane 2:40pm   @moorejohn True for our broadcast too… & the back channel can drive our content at times

Moorejohn 2:40pm  @HESherman I was seen as just a guy, not some cliched monster. People felt comfortable approaching me in theaters, and I welcomed it

ASC_Amy 2:40pm   @petermarksdrama I’m the same way. I’ll comment about a lot, but not politics or religion.

HESherman 2:39pm   @moorejohn So what’s your feeling about continuing now that you’re leaving the paper? Do you still want this presence?

Jfdubiner 2:39pm  @HESherman @petermarksdrama I want to hear about other interests/concerns/opinions. Talking only about theater gets boring.

Petermarksdrama 2:39pm  @HESherman @RobertFalls201don’t feel comfortable, e.g., commenting on political issues the way theatre people do on here. Journalist in me

Dloehr 2:39pm   @HESherman @petermarksdrama @RobertFalls201 …such as a common love of Tom Lehrer or Bob & Ray, for instance.

Michaeldove 2:39pm   RT @SMLois:     I think candid but careful might be the twitter motto for working professionals

RobertFalls201 2:39pm  @petermarksdrama Correct. Tricky to be both leader of an institution and individual artist. But that’s always an issue for me.

HESherman 2:38pm   @smlois Sort of the artistic Twitter version of “Trust, but verify”? 😉

Dloehr 2:38pm   @HESherman @petermarksdrama @RobertFalls201 What’s fascinating to me is finding those common interests beyond theatre…

Moorejohn 2:38pm  @HESherman Plus, social media connected me with new readers who didn’t buy my paper and never would’ve found me. Total game-changer

RobertFalls201 2:38pm  @HESherman @TheWing I too was urged by PR/Devo 2 blog about #RED. Found interesting to some but don’t want to just promote, want more

PirateQueenKate 2:38pm  Before Twitter, theaters could “demonize” a critic because the review was their only voice, now it can be contextualized more & discussed

HESherman 2:38pm   @petermarksdrama That’s an interesting point. We may start here given common interest in theatre, but how far beyond should we go?

Edenlane 2:37pm   GR8 rule of thumb RT @SMLois: I think candid but careful might be the twitter motto for working professionals

HESherman 2:36pm   @moorejohn How did social media change your image John? (and please hashtag all messages     to be sure they’re seen)

Petermarksdrama 2:36pm  @RobertFalls201 To me, Bob, it seems to have allowed you to open up on a variety of topics, not just theater…

SMLois 2:36pm    I think candid but careful might be the twitter motto for working professional

Klange 2:36pm  @PirateQueenKate @petermarksdrama Agreed. I’m no longer terrified of critics. I’ll take my lumps, but love the conversation

HESherman 2:36pm   RT @moorejohn: I was pretty much a presumed stereotype till people got to know me on social media.

HESherman 2:35pm   I first got involved in Tweeting and blogging at insistent urging of @TheWing’s Dir. of Web Development

Dloehr 2:35pm   @GwydionS Is it supposed to be different?

HESherman 2:35pm   @robertfalls201 Are you on Twitter at staff’s urging, personal interest, or what motivated you?

PirateQueenKate 2:34pm  I feel that @petermarksdrama is more accessible & now more someone I’d like to meet in person thanks to his tweets, not so before

Edenlane 2:33pm   great connection tool

RobertFalls201 2:33pm  Yes, got in trouble 1st wk (Should’ve used DM; in supporting colleagues, alienated others) Have had to learn 2 B candid but careful

HESherman 2:33pm   @petermarksdrama Same question does for you – are you engaging with people you didn’t know or didn’t expect (besides me)?

HESherman 2:32pm   @robertfalls201 So are you meeting new folks or connection with people you already knew professionally?

MariselaTOrta 2:32pm  @RobertFalls201 Who then do you find yourself talking to?

GwydionS 2:31pm   The fifth question: why is this Twitter chat different than all other Twitter chats? (Had to ask.)

Klange 2:31pm  @HESherman @RobertFalls201 @petermarksdrama I’m following!

RobertFalls201 2:30pm  I don’t think so. Originally thought I’d be talking with subs and @GoodmanTheatre #followers, but turns out that’s not the case…

HESherman 2:30pm   B4, people had to write or e-mail you, or maybe spot you in lobby, @petermarksdrama & @RobertFalls201. Now you’re avail nationally

Dloehr 2:30pm   @michaeldove @SMLois @hesherman @petermarksdrama @robertfalls201 Having survived #celebbowling for another day, I’m here.

Michaeldove 2:29pm   @SMLois @hesherman @petermarksdrama @robertfalls201 HERE, as well~

HESherman 2:29pm   @mariselatorta Wherever the conversation takes us. Starting with AD’s and critics being more accessible to audience, public.

RobertFalls201 2:28pm  I’m here. Bells on. Ready to make history.

SMLois 2:28pm   @HESherman @petermarksdrama @robertfalls201 following along here

HESherman 2:28pm   I’ll toss this out for both @petermarkdrama & @RobertFalls201: has using social media made you more accessible to general audience?

MariselaTOrta 2:27pm  @HESherman What’s the topic you three will be discussing?

Petermarksdrama 2:27pm  @HESherman @RobertFalls201 (raises hand) Present!

HESherman 2:26pm   @petermarksdrama @RobertFalls201 Anyone home? Ready to chat?

And such a wall, as I would have you think,

That had in it a crannied hole or chink…

– A Midsummer Night’s Dream

 I would like to state unequivocally that I believe in a well-funded, independent press/media and that in order to insure it remains as a check against those in power who would like to control or alter the information we learn or receive, we must pay for it. The end.

Now I will proceed to, essentially, contradict my first paragraph. But as media evolves, it’s all very tricky.

I’ve been around long enough to remember the days when, if something was written in a local newspaper or broadcast on local media in a community in which you did not reside, you either had to get someone to send you a clipping or, beginning in the 1980s, send you a tape of a broadcast. That was, of course, the dark ages compared to today, when Google News, You Tube and online media outlets around the world make it possible to access the vast majority of what is said or written of note, no matter where you are. Indeed, using websites, companies can now create and disseminate their own media, freed from the arbiters of the mass media, although with something less than its reach.

The advent of social media only accelerated this process, since you could now send friends, followers, and the like a link that would give them immediate access to the same material you uncovered. Local material could quickly become amplified, with the most compelling, absurd, or amusing going viral in a matter of days or even hours.

This has altered the playing field for arts organizations considerably. Throughout my career, I have had conversations with peers at other arts groups who are seeking “national press,” specifically coverage which would be readily accessible to a readership or viewership across the country, far beyond the scope of local media. This was true of virtually every organization outside of New York, which as a media capital offered an access that wasn’t equaled elsewhere. Sure, if you were in Chicago you had Oprah dreams, and those in Washington DC had an easier time attraction NPR and CPB, but however powerful those outlets were, they stood relatively alone.

After a few years, I began to speak, emphatically, about what I called “the myth of national press.” I was referring to the fact that, as media outlets consolidated and arts reporting shrank, there were only a handful of outlets that were truly national, in either ambition or reach. Time and Newsweek weren’t traveling the country, USA Today was a national paper with east coast-centric arts coverage (not the case for film, sports, or music, of course), The New York Times seemed to travel less and onlyThe Wall Street Journal bucked the trend by expanding national arts coverage in recent years. I coached organizations to measure their expectations, since the opportunities were becoming ever rarer.

That’s why I’ve been such a proponent of social media: because it restores and even enhances a national conversation on the arts, often prompted by the established media but sustained on Facebook, Twitter and other sites and services. In fact, it allows for conversations far beyond what had occurred even when there was more of a national arts media, because everyone had a voice, but it is still based in the major media.

But now we’re hitting a wall. More precisely, a paywall.

More and more newspapers are making their content accessible only to those who pay a fee, be it monthly, weekly or per article. I have a hard time arguing against this strategy, for the very reasons stated in my first paragraph. Yet I regret it enormously, because it will have the effect of once again narrowing the national conversation about the arts if we can’t read what’s being written in other communities as fodder for our own conversations, tweets and blogs.  While I might not miss either of these particular conversations, imagine if paywalls had prevented us from reading Stephen Sondheim’s letter about the new production of Porgy and Bess back in August, or if the argument over Shakespeare’s authorship prompted by the film Anonymous hadn’t elicited so many different views? What if reviews couldn’t be aggregated and linked, so that we were truly restricted to a handful of opinions? Even as we mourn for the decline of newspapers, it’s impossible now to think of being blocked from access to any news outlet we like, whenever we like. For those of us who have become curators of coverage, the vistas we pass on to our readers and followers will become ever narrower.

Yes, there are chinks in the wall, as Shakespeare provided for his comic lovers Pyramus and Thisbe. The adept can clear histories, remove cookies and avail themselves of relatively easy workarounds, but many more will stop dead when told they need to enter their credit card number to read on.

I love engaging in conversation with both professionals and amateurs over issues in the arts and I applaud how the internet has democratized access to media, giving us all the possibility of becoming broadcasters. But I worry about losing the most powerful voices after having had them for less than a generation. Perhaps there could be an internet version of the sports blackout, where local games cannot be seen for free in local markets, in order not to undermine live attendance? Surely the technology exists. After all, the Minneapolis Star Tribune loses no business by letting me read it for free online, since I wouldn’t be buying it in the first place, even if it were available to me. Perhaps foundations dedicated to the arts could pay newspapers to keep those portions of their websites free? It’s a long shot, but not impossible. Maybe some papers, like The Washington Post, will master monetizing their websites without charging users for access.

Against all odds, there is still terrific arts writing, both critical and feature, in this country, and its has been a privilege for the past 15 years to read more of it than I ever had before. But we now have the quandary of our horizons shrinking in order to save the very media that we want to access, making conversation ever more local once again. I will read as much as I can for as long as I can, but every day, the Wall Street Journal, The New York Times, The Boston Globe, the Star-Tribune and their brethren…they place another brick in the wall. And the walls are closing in.

This post originally appeared on the 2amtheatre website.