I just left the Radical Trust session, which was an engaging, exciting discussion that showed the many nuances we are all facing in determining answers to questions created by the technologies and cultural shifts inherent in our 2.0 and beyond world:

• Where are the dividing lines between user comments, user-generated content, and audience expertise?
• Who are the experts in history?
• What is the role of a history organization in navigating and participating in multi-source conversations that are occurring with or without us?
• How does this idea of trusting and opening our systems and programs to users ultimately play out, and where do we create bumpers around that process?

I felt the discussion revealed a shift that is occurring now between history organizations as the “official expert” voice on all things historical to a more nuanced role as facilitator of discussions and learning about history.  While some argued that our role is to protect the public from tools that do not vet content (the dreaded Wikipedia) because we are trusted as the experts, others, I included questioned that role.  As a staff member at a statewide historical organization, I am comfortable saying that we do not have on staff an expert for each element of Ohio history, yet it is our role to provide that expertise.  Are we then, to be experts and seen as such, or are we to know where to find that expertise?  Is all of that expertise in our organization or even in academia?  For Ohio, it is not.  If one looks at our Civil War 150 initiative, it is quickly apparent that the historians, reenactors, geneaologists, and others who have spent a lifetime researching Civil War history know more than I do despite my title as state coordinator.  How, then, can I harness and share that knowledge?

At the same time, this idea of audience expertise and content, if carried to its ultimate culmination, has consequences that worry us.  If a bulk of incorrect information is pushed out through the channels “officially” under our auspices, what is our accountability for misinformation propagated as history?  If our audiences engage in a brawl over race, gender, or other issues inherent in our nation’s history, what is our responsibility to keeping it clean or to censoring the worst of the comments?  I may lean toward openness because of my background in outreach and community work, but those in other professional fields have their own biases regarding engagement, accuracy, and appropriateness.

While the session didn’t answer questions as much as trigger them, two things were clear: 1) this is not a brand new issue, though it is accelerated by technology now.  2) this is not going away, and it offers unprecedented opportunities for our field to define itself.  We can become the facilitator and convener of conversations among our audiences, and we can work to promote good critical thinking rather than uninformed opining.  It’s not an easy challenge, but I left this morning’s session excited to take it on!

The first session I attended Thursday morning dealt with studying our visitor populations.  The presenters spent many hours pouring over data about the people coming to their institutions.  Interestingly, researchers haven’t found a main driver for why people were coming to the individual museums and have found that the reasons changed for each museum.  I guess this makes sense since museums have such a variety of missions.  Also, interestingly,  the majority of visitors interviewed decided to come to the museum within day or so from their visit, whether they came from the local region or from afar.  Take aways: try to find out who’s visiting your institution, why they are coming, and market accordingly.

A squeaky metal cart pushes across a large stage.  The orchestral librarian moves from station to station, stopping at each music stand long enough to select the correct score before continuing on noisily.  As the squeaks slowly transition from foreground to background,  National Public Radio’s (NPR) Susan Stamberg begins to tell the story of the Chicago Symphony Orchestra.

Stamberg recalled this story as part of her keynote address at the 2010 AASLH Annual Meeting.  Originally she had wanted to open her National Public Radio (NPR) segment with the sounds of the orchestra warming up before their performance.  But, still early in her career with NPR (which has now spanned nearly four decades), her producer urged her to reconsider.  Everyone expects you to open a story on an orchestra with warm-up sounds, she told Stamberg.  People cooking their dinners will change the radio station away from  All Things Considered, the producer warned.  Instead of opening with the obvious, Stamberg was encouraged to open with the unexpected.

At first upset about having her story changed, Stamberg soon realized that her producer was right.  She needed a hook–something to keep her radio audience listening.  So she went back and listened to all the audio recorded from her time with the orchestra and selected the sounds of a squeaky score cart for her story instead.

Stamberg has continued to employ this strategy throughout her radio career.  Each time she begins a new story, she looks for a way to introduce her segment with something unexpected.  Then, once the audience has been drawn in, she’ll deliver her message.

This same philosophy works for museums and other non-profits as well.  Instead of opening a fundraising campaign, e-newsletter article, marketing brochure, or text panel the way that everyone would expect, step back and think of a way to capture your audience with something unexpected.  Find a way to grab their attention, entertain, and make them want to know more.

As an example, marketing, communications, and fundraising consultant Tom Ahern often applies this same philosophy to his fundraising campaigns.  In a recent blog post about an alumni-giving appeal, Ahern advocated opening with, “Pity public schools like [Our State] University.  We can’t ever get any better — until we drum up lots more philanthropic support from you and other proud [Our State University] alums.”  Not quite your typical alumni appeal letter opening–but one which certainly will grab the reader’s attention.

So, the next time you’re creating a direct mail campaign or writing a tour script, consider Stamberg’s advice.  Think about how you would normally open your dialogue and, rather than choose the expected, go with the unexpected instead.

From the Connecticut Humanities Council’s Heritage Resource Center blog

David Anderson, Executive Director for the Creek Council House Museum in Okmulgee, OK, was the featured speaker for the Small Museums Luncheon today.  He shared the story of the long partnership between the museum non-profit board and the town of Okmulgee – a partnership that has been more than strained at times.  (Read shouting matches, but not fisticuffs.)

David shared four recommendations in building partnerships:

One – remember that partnerships are all rooted in personal relationships.  Don’t treat partners as a means to an end.  You are developing a relationship.

Two – consider each partner’s needs, but focus on their wants.  This was a big surprise to me – aren’t the needs the most important piece of the puzzle?  What he shared was that while the needs may be the motivating and perhaps rational purpose for a partnership, the wants are frequently what defines the decision-making process.  David shared that as a smoker, he needs to quit for health reasons, for economic reasons, and because it takes up so much of his time – but in the end, he wants to smoke, and that’s why he is still a smoker.  So when you think about your and your potential partner’s reasons for partnering, don’t just think about why they need you and why you need them, but think about the wants and try to meet those through the partnership.

Three – imagine your partners and potential partners out 10 years.  How are your needs and wants going to change? Is what seems perfect today still going to make sense in the future?  If not, start making new overtures for partners or planting the seeds for change now.

Four – and perhaps the most brass tacks recommendation – consider adding community service to the job descriptions of your staff and board members.  Make it a priority for your organization’s workforce and leadership to be involved in your community in other ways.  While this may eventually lead to direct benefits for your museum, it’s really a way of demonstrating that the people associated with your museum value your community and other community organizations simply for what they are.

I’m sorry you’re getting my comments in chunks – the wireless at the convention center and I were not getting along when I actually had a bit of downtime.  My day started with having to call in to a board meeting via conference call, which made me late to the Educators Breakfast.  Others have much more eloquently posted about the moving presentation and discussion.

After lunch, I went to the session on successful family programming organized by the USS Constitution Center Museum.  Two things really resonated for me.  Heather Nielsen from the Denver Art Museum said their message to families is “make the gallery your living room” – they expect families to sit on the floor to unpack the activity backpacks, which isn’t your usual art museum!

The other thing that really impressed me was that the presenting institutions had all defined success – they knew what they wanted the family programming to do before they developed the specific content or format.   I don’t feel like I always step back to do that enough. 

I also had my NPR fix today as well.  Susan Stamberg’s keynote was interesting, though a bit art museum heavy in her illustrations.  But tonight, after a very popular SHA reception, my roommate and I skipped the evening event in order to go to a live show of NPR’s “Wait Wait Don’t Tell Me” which happened to be in OKC.  I’m looking forward to hearing what makes it into the actual broadcast, compared to the almost two hours we saw.  It was a full house with a very enthusiastic audience and the fun of “behind the scenes” that so many of us enjoy.   I’ve now also ridden in a limo, thanks to the hotel’s complimentary limo which gave us a ride each way.  You never know what new experiences  you’ll encounter at a conference! 

Time to sleep so I have the energy for a full day of sessions tomorrow!

I’m glad Tim already mentioned the Barbed Wire Study Collection we saw at the National Cowboy & Western Heritage Museum last night.  Museum fatigue had already set in from my tour during the day so I’ll admit I couldn’t fully appreciate the Museum, beyond its breadth and depth.  The two things that caught my attention though were the barbed wire study collection and the Traditional Cowboy Art Association exhibit.

I’m glad that I can still be surprised by collections.  There’s always a part of that goes “someone is collecting that?” but then I step back to think about what a collection tells us.  It’s a reminder that what we collect tells people not only about those objects but about us and what we value.  There was a book in the shop about how barbed wire changed the west that I may need to ILL through my local library.  The collection has me intrigued – not just about barbed wire here, but now I want to ask my mom about if and how they used barbed wire on our family farm in upstate NY (after 180 years in the family, it was sold the  year I was born). 

I was blown away by the artistry at the Traditional Cowboy Arts Association exhibit and sale.  The members use their skills in silversmithing, leatherworking, and other traditional cowboy-related arts to create gorgeous pieces.  The star piece for me was a collaborative piece between a saddlemaker and a silvermith – a beautiful leather trunk with silver accents.  If you have time, look at the online catalog (http://www.nationalcowboymuseum.org/events/tcaa/2010catalog.html).  I appreciate the exhibit for the artistry, but again, also as another way it made me think about this part of the country and how little I know about it.

I’m now hoping that I have an opportunity to come back to Oklahoma City, just so I can spend a day at the Museum.

A collection of what I heard/read/thought about today at the conference:

“It’s the story of our democracy, what we fear, hate, overcome and incorporate.”  Keynoter Susan Stamberg on what American museums can be about.

“Don’t touch everything instead of don’t touch anything.”   “Can we make things evocative and keep them safe at the same time?”   “How long is perpetuity anyway?”

And from my session with Ken Yellis, responses to the question, “Why resist the big idea?”

“Are we leading or reporting?”

“Are we taking sides?  Are we afraid?”

“how much does relevance impact the big idea?”

“how do you overcome communities that don’t want to know?”

“how does the need for compromise impact the formation, relevance, and interaction with big ideas?”

More to come on our session and all our thoughtful participants soon on The Uncataloged Museum.

You’ve got to appeal to both parents and kids equally –  that was a take-away message from the session “Engaging All Ages – A Discussion of Successful Family Programming.” If the kids don’t like it, the family won’t come back or if the parents don’t like it, the family won’t come back. It is the ideal, of course, that parents and kids have an equally satisfying visit when families visit your museum or historic site. But I think the scales are tipped in the kids’ favor. If the kids aren’t engaged, the family will be out of a particular gallery in five minutes, even if the parents love it. But if the exhibit or program is well ‘below’ the parents’ level and they’re bored to tears while the kids are having the time of their lives, the parents aren’t going to drag them out of there after five minutes. And if the kids beg them, they’ll probably come back with them.  Of course, I’m not a parent. A voice from those trenches may say something different.

On another note, I might be having slight inferiority complex here. I went to a session titled, “Digital Collections in the Classroom and Beyond” and all the panelists were from Wake Forest University, two from the university’s anthropology museum and one professor of African history who had his students use the museum’s collection in a seminar. Their slides and literature showed gorgeous, colorful masks and figurines and other ethnographic items from around the world. I wondered, could we get teachers and students as interested in our collection, which is largely archival and photographic material of our parish (a Louisiana county) history? My initial reaction was to  think that their collection was dare I say – cooler. To ease this sense of inferiority, is there any small historical museum or archive out there who is using their collections in classrooms at any level, grade school through college? I wish you were on the panel, too, but care to share anything here?

As Kyle wrote, we had a thought-provoking session this morning at the educators and interpreters breakfast.

Lynn Roller got us all talking with some good questions. My table discussed how organizations such as the Memorial Museum can remain relevant over time.  The Memorial museum’s mission allows it to go beyond a recounting of the day of the tragedy. It states that “the memorial and museum are dedicated to educating visitors about the impact of violence, informing about events surrounding the bombing, and inspiring hope and healing through lessons learned by those affected.”  Given the broad mission of the organization, its staff members are able to use changing exhibitions and programs to keep audiences engaged.

Some other comments made during our discussion:

- Bring current events into a discussion

- While an act of violence can happen in a second, it’s the way in which we react that contains powerful, timeless messages.

- We were all struck by the survivor Amy Petty’s comment, “Everyone has been buried under the rubble of their lives.” While most of us have not gone through the trauma she did, her statement allowed us to connect with her.

- We were all impressed by the Memorial Museums efforts to collect comments from visitors at computer stations located throughout the building

- How do you tell the same story again and again without sounding rote? Passion behind the message makes it come alive. Finding connections to today makes it fresh.

A few other museums / historic sites were mentioned:

The United State Holocaust Memorial Museum, especially the exhibition on recent genocide

Museum of Peace in Caen, France

International Coalition of Sites of Conscience

WOW!  This morning’s Educator and Interpreters breakfast session was the most inspiring session I have attended in a very long time.  Lynne Roller, from the OKC Memorial spoke about the challenges of dealing with sensitive issues such as the bombing of the Murrow building, 15 years ago already.  She was accompanied by Ms. Petty, one of the survivors to the tragic event.  Ms. Petty gave a mesmerizing accountof her story and ended with her renewed outlook on life after being rescued after being buried under rubble for 6 1/2 hours. their motto:  “You’ve seen the news, now see the stories behind the news.”

The conversation at our table dealt with “How do you deal with the perpetrators?”  Sharron Wilkins Conrad, from the 6th Floor Museum at Dealey Plaza, said that they discuss Lee Harvey Oswald, but try to minimize his story to the evidence against him.  Lynne Roller said that the story of Timothy McVeigh, et al. is dealt with in the same way.  They mention them on the side, deal with the evidence, and both agreed, not to get involved with conspiracy theories.

It made me think that you don’t have to be dealing with topics as tragic as the ones mentioned to have this same issue in interpretation.  I remember when the Arizona Historical Society museum in Tucson opened an exhibit about 8 years ago that featured weapons from the Spanish Colonial Period.  At the opening, a Yaqui Indian woman discussed the pain she felt when looking at those items behind the glass.  “Those weapons could have been the ones that killed some of my ancestors.”

History is full of these types of situations.  All are sensitive; and some more sensitive to certain people than others.  I think, however, if we do not discuss all aspects–it will become unreal.  People will get too far removed from the situation and we run the risk of losing valuable lessons in the process.