Once again, I tried to get my boss to wrap her brain around the series of tubes.
And again, I got nowhere with it. Disgusted by our website, I suggested
that we could start with rebranding our museum exhibits in the least
expensive medium available -- our website.
To me, traditional and online exhibits are equally necessary. In
today’s world, you cannot have a static, crappy museum website. At
museum association meetings, museums continually raise the issue that
potential audiences are increasingly fractured and it’s going to get
harder and harder to attract and retain audiences. People have a lot of
options when it comes to their free time -- movies, sports, video games,
recreational drug use -- and folks often choose something other than
museums. Well, y’know, if we spent a quarter of the time developing rich
and engaging websites, and just playing with the many technologies and
ideas available to us -- we wouldn’t be 40 years behind the times, we’ll
only be 15 and closing the gap. It is unrealistic to think that people
will use a museum website only to figure out your hours and phone
number. Yes, people want to know your hours and location. But they also
want to get a sense for your brand, what you’re all about to make an
informed decision about whether or not to spend their time (and money)
in your museum.
The web is a 24-hour environment. People could want to know about
your collections, the local history, your current exhibits, and your
special events at any moment. And every time someone clicks on our
website only to find a 1995-designed site (think geocities) with
craptastic content is an opportunity lost. I have tried fruitlessly to
convince my boss of the importance of this. I came into this position
with far more experience in web exhibit development than “regular”
exhibit development, but she just doesn’t seem to get it. The fact that
our website is a portal back to the days of Gopher and Telnet both
implicitly and explicitly reinforces our backasswards interpretation and
indicates to potential visitors that if they want current,
cutting-edge, and modern, we are not the place. She just does NOT get
this. She thinks that we should stick to “being historians.” I may be a
historian, but I’m also aware that the web is for content-delivery, not
just bells and whistles of cool special effects and flash. And as a
content creator, I am willing to put any delivery method to use, and the
web is the easiest and most effective way to reach the greatest
audiences.
One thing was clear from our conversation. I know far more about
technology than anyone else with whom I work. Which is scary because I
know only enough to be dangerous. I think sometimes people confuse my
understanding of these words and concepts with having the skills to make
it happen. I know exhibit development, and I have a good eye for what
makes good design. But that doesn’t mean I know web design. It doesn’t
mean I know CSS & HTML backwards and forwards. If I did, I assure
you, I’d be making a helluva lot more money and working many fewer
hours.
Monday, December 18, 2006
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment