 |
|
|
|||||
In a February 2025 Truth Social post, President Donald Trump declared a Golden Age in Arts and Culture. So far, this golden age has entailed an executive order calling for the federal agency that funds local museums and libraries to be dismantled, with most grants rescinded. The Trump administration has forbidden federal arts funding from going to artists who promote what the administration calls gender ideology. Theres been a purge of the board of the Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts, with Trump appointing himself chair. And the administration has canceled National Endowment for the Humanities grants. Suffice it to say, many artists and arts organizations across the U.S. are worried: Will government arts funding dry up? Do these cuts signal a new war on arts and culture? How do artists make it through this period of change? As scholars who study the arts, activism and policy, were watching the latest developments with apprehension. But we think its important to point out that while the U.S. government has never been a global leader of arts funding, American artists have always been innovative, creative and scrappy during times of political turmoil. A rocky relationship with the arts For much of the countrys early history, government funding for the arts was rarely guaranteed or stable. After the Civil War, the Second Industrial Revolution facilitated massive concentrations of wealth, in what became known as the the Gilded Age. Private arts funding soared during this period, with some titans of industry, such as Andrew Carnegie and John D. Rockefeller, seeing it as their duty to build museums, theaters and libraries for the public. The heavy reliance on private funding for the arts troubled some Americans, who feared these institutions would become too exposed to the whims of the wealthy. In response, Progressive Era activists and politicians argued that it was the governments responsibility to build arts spaces accessible to all Americans. Efforts to fund the arts expanded with the election of Franklin D. Roosevelt in 1932, as the country was reeling from the Great Depression. From 1935 to 1943, the Works Progress Administration provided jobs with stable wages for artists through the Federal Art Project. However, Congress famously terminated the program in response to a 1937 production of The Revolt of the Beavers, which conservative politicians denounced for containing overt Marxist themes. Nonetheless, over the ensuing decades, the federal government generally signaled its support for the arts. Congress established the National Endowment for the Arts and the National Endowment for the Humanities in 1965 to fund arts organizations and artists. And since 1972, the General Services Administration has commissioned public art for federal buildings and organized a registry of prospective artists. The NEA gave US$8.4 million in direct funding to artists in 1989 via fellowships and grants. This might be considered the high-water mark for unrestricted government funding for individual artists. By the 1980s, sexuality, drugs and American morality had become hot-button political issues. The arts, from music to theater, were at the center of this culture war. Pressure escalated in 1989 when conservative leaders contested two NEA-funded exhibitions featuring work by Andres Serrano and Robert Mapplethorpe, which they deemed homoerotic and anti-Christian. In 1990, Congress instated a decency clause guiding all future NEA work. When Republicans regained control of Congress in 1994, they slashed direct funding for the arts. With direct funding to artists largely eliminated, todays artists can indirectly receive federal government support through federal arts agency grants, which are given to arts organizations that then dole out a portion to artists. Local and state government agencies also provide small amounts of direct support for artists. The stage of democracy Artists and arts organizations have a long legacy of persistence and strategic organizing during periods of political and economic upheaval. In the pre-Revolutionary colonies, representatives of the British government banned theatrical performances to discourage revolutionary action. In response, activist playwrights organized underground parlor dramas and informal dramatic readings to keep arts-based activism alive. Activist theater continued into the antebellum period for the purposes of promting the abolitionist cause. These dramas, often organized by women, would take place in living rooms, outside of public view. The clandestine staged readings the most famous of which was written by one of the earliest Black American playwrights, William Wells Brown seeded enthusiasm and solidarity for the antislavery cause. These privately staged readings took place alongside public performances and lectures. Craft the world you want Dozens of experimental schools like the Highlander Folk School in Tennessee and Commonwealth College in Arkansas were founded in the 1920s and 1930s to train activists. Supporting adult learners of all ages but specifically young adults they initially focused on arts-based techniques for training workers in labor activism. For example, students wrote short plays based on their experiences of factory work. In their rehearsals and performances, they imagined endings in which workers triumphed over cruel bosses. Many programs were residential, rural and embraced early versions of mutual aid, where artists and activists support one another directly through pooling money and resources. Tuition was minimal and generally provided directly from labor organizations and allies, including the American Fund for Public Service. Most teachers were volunteers, and the learning communities often farmed to cover basic necessities. Although these institutions faced perpetual threats from local governments and even the FBI, these communal schools became testing grounds for social change. Some programs even became training sites for civil rights activists. Linda Goode Bryant attends the opening reception of an exhibition honoring Just Above Midtown at the Museum of Modern Art in New York City on Oct. 3, 2022. [Photo: Eugene Gologursky/Getty Images for The Museum of Modern Art] Curate the world you need Black artists have long created spaces for community connection and career development. The Great Migration brought many Black American artists and thinkers to New York City, famously spurring the Harlem Renaissance, which lasted from the end of World War I through the 1920s. During this period, the neighborhood became a fountain of culture, with Black artists producing countless plays, books, music and other visionary works. This legacy continued at Just Above Midtown, or JAM, a gallery and arts laboratory led by Linda Goode Bryant from 1974 through 1986 on West 57th Street in Manhattan. At the time, arts organizations primarily supported artwork by white men. In response, Goode Bryant launched JAM to create a space that supported and celebrated artists of color. JAM provided arts business workshops, cultivated collaborations and launched the careers of Black artists such as David Hammons and Lorraine O’Grady. The future is now Whether or not they realize it, many artists and arts organizations today are integrating lessons from the past. In recent years, theyve promoted the unionization of museum workers and created local mutual aid networks such as the Museum Workers Relief Fund, which was one of many groups fundraising for arts workers during the COVID-19 pandemic. Theyre building networks of financial support to share space and money with other artists and arts organizations. And theyre forming cultural land trusts, which create land cooperatives where artists can work and live with one another. Whats more, new philanthropic models are reshaping arts funding by elevating the perspectives of artists, rather than those of wealthy funders. CAST in San Francisco helps arts organizations find affordable gallery and performance spaces. The Community and Cultural Power Fund uses a trust-based philanthropy model that allows artists and community members to decide who receives future grants. The Ruth Foundation for the Arts makes artists the decision-makers in giving grants to arts organizations. While the current challenges are unprecedented and funding threats will likely reshape arts organizations and further limit direct support for artists were confident that the arts will persist with or without government support. Johanna K. Taylor is an associate professor at The Design School at Arizona State University. Mary McAvoy is an associate professor of theatre at Arizona State University. This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.
Category:
E-Commerce
Before Congress passed the Clean Water Act in 1972, U.S. factories and cities could pipe their pollution directly into waterways. Rivers, including the Potomac in Washington, smelled of raw sewage and contained toxic chemicals. Ohios Cuyahoga River was so contaminated, its oil slicks erupted in flames. That unchecked pollution didnt just harm the rivers and their ecosystems; it harmed the humans who relied on their water. The Clean Water Act established a federal framework to restore and maintain the chemical, physical, and biological integrity of the Nations waters. As an attorney and law professor, Ive spent my career upholding these protections and teaching students about their legal and historical significance. Thats why Im deeply concerned about the federal governments new efforts to roll back those safeguards and the impact theyll have on human lives. Amid all the changes out of Washington, it can be easy to lose sight of not only which environmental policies and regulations are being rolled back, but also of who is affected. The reality is that communities already facing pollution and failing infrastructure can become even more vulnerable when federal protections are stripped away. Those laws are ultimately meant to protect the quality of the tap water people drink and the rivers they fish in, and in the long-term health of their neighborhoods. A few of the most pressing concerns in my view include the governments moves to narrow federal water protections, pause water infrastructure investments and retreat from environmental enforcement. Diminishing protection for U.S. wetlands In 2023, the Supreme Court narrowed the definition of waters of the United States. In its decision in Sackett vs. Environmental Protection Agency, the court determined that only wetlands that maintained a physical surface connection to other federally protected waters qualified for protection under the Clean Water Act. Wetlands are important for water quality in many areas. They naturally filter pollution from water, reduce flooding in communities and help ensure that millions of Americans enjoy cleaner drinking water. The Clean Water Act limits what industries and farms can discharge or dump into those waterways considered waters of the U.S. However, mapping by the Natural Resources Defense Council found that upward of 84%, or 70 million acres, of the nations wetlands lacked protection after the ruling. The Sackett ruling also called into question the definition of waters of the U.S. The Trump EPA, in announcing its plans to rewrite the definition in 2025, said it would make accelerating economic opportunity a priority by reducing red tape and costs for businesses. Statements from the administration suggest that officials want to loosen restrictions on industries discharging pollution and construction debris into wetlands. Pollution already harms wetlands along Floridas Gulf Coast, leading to fewer fish and degraded water quality. It also affects people whose jobs depend on healthy waterways for fishing, recreation and tourism. This marks a shift away from the federal government protecting wetlands for the role they play in public health and resilience. Instead, it prioritizes development and industry even if that means more pollution. Pausing investment for rebuilding crumbling infrastructure Public water systems are also at risk. The Trump administration on its first full day in office froze at least US$10 billion in federal water infrastructure funding. That included money for replacing lead pipes and building new water treatment plants, allocated under the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law of 2021 and the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022. Public water systems across the country have been falling into disrepair in recent decades due to aging and sometimes dangerous infrastructure, as cities with lead water pipes have discovered. The American Society of Civil Engineers gave the nations drinking water, stormwater and wastewater infrastructure grades of a C-minus, D and D-plus, respectively, in its 2025 Infrastructure Report Card. The group estimates that Americas drinking water systems alone need more than $625 billion in investment over the next 20 years to reach a state of good repair. Congress passed the Infrastructure Law and the Inflation Reduction Act to help pay for updating drinking water, wastewater and stormwater systems. That included replacing lead pipes and tackling water contamination, especially in the most vulnerable communities. Many of the same communities also have high poverty and unemployment rates and histories of racial segregation rooted in government discrimination. Where I live in Detroit, this need is especially clear. We have the fourth-highest number of lead service lines, connecting water mains to buildings, of any city in the country, and these pipes continue to put people at risk every day. Just an hour up the road, the Flint water crisis left a predominantly Black, working-class community to suffer the consequences of lead-contaminated water. These arent abstract problems; theyre happening right now, in real communities, to real people. Dropping lawsuits meant to stop pollution The Trump administraions decision to drop from some environmental enforcement lawsuits filed by previous administrations is adding to the risks that communities face. The administration argues that these decisions are about reducing regulatory burdens dropping these lawsuits reduces costs for companies. However, stepping back from these lawsuits leaves the communities without a meaningful way to put an end to the long-standing harms of environmental pollution. Few communities have the resources to litigate against private polluters and must rely on regulatory agencies to sue on their behalf. Real lives are affected by these changes What America is seeing now is more than a change in regulatory approach. Its a step back from decades of progress that made the nations water safer and communities healthier. President Donald Trump talked repeatedly on the campaign trail about wanting clean air and clean water. However, the administrations moves to reduce protection for wetlands, freeze infrastructure investments and abandon environmental enforcement can have real consequences for both. At a time when so many systems are already under strain, it raises the question: What kind of commitment is the federal government really making to the future of clean water in America? Jeremy Orr is an adjunct professor of law at Michigan State University. This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.
Category:
E-Commerce
Conflict management is one of the most critical leadership skills today, yet many leaders are struggling to get it right. Companies are implementing return-to-office mandates; shifting stances on diversity, equity, and inclusion; and dealing with climate change and an uncertain economy. All of these factors put pressure on businesses and the people who work for them. Over 80% of workers report escalated tensions in the workplace, and 90% of workers say they have witnessed political clashes between coworkers. Employees are feeling uncomfortable because they are unsure how they fit into company goals, or dont feel clear about where the company is headed. This tension leads to conflict, and its up to the leaders to manage the situation. When we teach conflict management, there are several classic models and approaches. Some call for weighing goal achievement versus relationship orientation, while others look to balance assertion versus cooperation. In all scenarios, there is an underlying assumption: Leaders foster the climate that determines whether employees will engage in collegial discourse. In other words, people who disagree should be comfortable advocating for their position while listening to others points of view. While this notion works well in theory, the practical manager knows this is not always the case. In recent years, hybrid work has made free-flowing communication opportunities and seeing things eye-to-eye more challenging, literally. While its widely recommended that you should not accept what you read, having a conversation to ask for more clarity is not always natural (or even possible) in a hybrid setting. So, what do you do when mixed-work modality team members are in conflict with one another, with the company, or even with you? As the leader, your job is to manage the situation. The challenge is determining how to approach conflict in a way that is both constructive and comfortable. The Remote Work Factor There are many efficiencies afforded by flexible work arrangements, but a side effect of remote (and sometimes asynchronous) work is that conversations between coworkers are often limited to scheduled check-ins and meetings. Consequently, coworker interactions are relatively two-dimensional. Employees make inferences and judgments from emailed statements or Slack DMs that rarely, if ever, tell the full story of ones perspective and context. Compounding this issue is the fact that todays multigenerational workforce has significantly different comfort levels using different modalities for collaboration. Gen Z and millennial employees have learned communication norms that entail a heavy reliance on direct messaging and video calls versus talking things through with one another. In fact, 46% of workers report they have engaged in full arguments over chat-based applications. Meanwhile, members of all generations have varying preferences for direct communicationwhether in person, via phone, or video. The shift toward remote and hybrid work has complicated communication particularly as it pertains to giving feedback. In traditional office settings, mentorship and sharing feedback often occur naturally through hallway conversations, post-meeting discussions, or informal manager check-ins. One of the drawbacks of remote work can be the elimination of these spontaneous opportunities. Without casual in-person interactions, employees must deliberately schedule feedback conversations, which can make the process feel more formal and high-stakes than a quick chat in the office. As a consequence, performance itself can become a source of conflict since remote employees are 32% less likely to receive real-time feedback, including what has been working well, and what needs to change. Navigating the Next Era of Workplace Conflict When teams realize that what they are doing is not working, conflicts will happen. Due to not having the opportunity to bring issues up until they become undeniable, conflicts may have festered and therefore may be emotionally charged. We recommend three considerations for those ready to rise to the challenge of hybrid or remote conflict management. 1. Be honest about what you’re seeingand why it’s a problem A first crucial element to managing conflict is that leaders call out what they are seeing and then discuss observations with their team. For example, although sentiments are mixed when it comes to how politics should be brought into or left out of the workplace, there is no denying that stakeholders and stockholders alike have been impacted by various international events and executive orders. From the impact tariffs may have on a companys ability to import materials, to the impact layoffs may have on staffing, what needs to be considered in our work today is different than it was a few weeks ago. Leaders cant ignore what is going on around them. One of the tenets of psychologist and author Daniel Golemans model of emotionally intelligent leadership posits that a leaders primary responsibility is to be in sync with their followers. In order to be able to react in a way that resonates with ones team, leadrs should know whether something may cause apprehension, excitement, or concern among their reports. In fact, if managers are oblivious to or ignore any elements of the world that concern their employees, they will cause further frustration or be dismissed themselves. One option is for leaders to start their weekly check-ins with a current events update. Share top headlines and explain how news may impact the organization in the coming week or months. If a company does change its policies due to shifts in federal or state sentiments, acknowledge these and explain how this shift will affect your team members directly or indirectly. If you dont know how to get discussions going, its likely that your companys communication department has created talking points for managers to use. In smaller companies, ask the human resources department for some guidelines on how to explain changes to employees. You should not feel alone in what you say, but you should take responsibility for bringing changes up. 2. Get to know your team If a leader doesnt know what the team cares about in the first place, it will be impossible to connect their perceptions to conflicts that may erupt. Meanwhile, those employees who have not learned how to self-advocate may struggle finding the right time and place to raise their concerns (and voices) constructively. Leaders who bridge these two scenarios can mitigate conflicts or manage them when they arise. As mentioned earlier, resonant leaders are those in sync with their followers emotionally. They understand that an employee who is seeking international relocation may see global affairs differently than one who has a domestic promotion agenda. If your company conducts business with countries involved in tariff discussions, some company leaders may worry about how financial reporting will be adversely impacted. Knowing what is important to your team enables you to proactively manage topics that may become conflicts. Because of this, its important that leaders take the time to listen to their employees when they share what matters to them. Whether there is data from a formal performance review and goal-setting session, or youve gone to lunch with a member of your team, take inventory of what you know about each individual and what is important to them. If you are not already in the habit of doing so, use your one-on-one meetings as opportunities to bring up what you know, and ask your team members to share how they are feeling about a related element of their job or development plan they had established. If employees dont share topics of frustration or worry, ask open-ended questions that provide the opportunity to express their concerns or identify paths they wish to explore. And, if youre not having in-person or virtual on-on-ones, now is a very good time to start. 3. Learn to communicate proactively and address conflict remotely If you were walking down a hallway and heard someone complaining, youd know they are unhappy. But if your interactions with your team members are limited to when they choose to turn their webcams and microphones on, you will not have the same windows of insight. Identifying potential conflicts and managing ones that have already come into focus require an adjustment of management techniques. Similar to knowing and understanding what team members may value, its incumbent upon a manager to know some of their direct reports attitudinal tells. If an employee shakes their head a little more than usual in agreement or asks the same question more than once and does not seem to apply what they learn, these may be signs that remote workers are struggling to stay focused or engaged. It has been said many times before, but when working with a remote workforce, you cannot overcommunicate. Leaders need to establish a cadence of regular meetings and also be sure to casually check in with informal conversations and temperature checks. Information that is verbally shared in a meeting should also be documented and distributed via written communiqués to avoid miscommunication or misunderstanding, which can also lead to conflict. When remote employees are simply not performing according to expectations, leaders need to manage their performance in the same way they would for in-person employees. Letting issues go or looking the other way is not an option. On the flipside, its important to understand that sometimes what youthe leaderare doing is the cause of the conflict. One-third of employees have indicated that their bosses are too aggressive in text messages. Therefore, to avoid greater conflicts, leaders must address the situation directly and manage just as they would if the employee worked in the office. To preempt any issues, leaders must become comfortable saying, Hey, can you stay on the line for a minute? Use this time after the regular meeting to acknowledge what you are seeing and ask for feedback on the initiative, the players, or the process being employed to address the work. If the opportunity to talk right after another meeting is missed, its okay to email or send a Slack message to an employee to ask: Do you have time later to hop on a quick Zoom? I want to go over X topic. Its important to be specific about the agenda so that there isnt cause for alarm as to the subject of the conversation. That said, we also suggest doing this when you are able to jump on a call in the not-too-distant future, as requesting a meeting may still induce anxiety. Bring People Together to Manage Conflict When workers are not in the same physical space, facilitating conflict management is not easy. While its easy enough to ignore what may be distressing your team or assume that everyone interprets things the same way, managers should openly address differences, ask questions, and demonstrate flexibility when conflict arises. By deliberately managing communication in a way that normalizes healthy conflict, leaders create an environment where everyone feels heard and understood.
Category:
E-Commerce
All news |
||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||