View
218
Download
0
Category
Preview:
Citation preview
Available Online at http://iassr.org/journal
2013 (c) EJRE published by
International Association of Social Science Research - IASSR
European Journal of
Research on Education
ISSN: 2147-6284 European Journal of Research on Education, 2014, Special Issue: Contemporary Studies
in Social Science, 12-18
The museum experience and social media
Aynur Karagöl a *
aYildiz Technical University, Faculty of Art & Design, Department of Interactive Media Design, M.sc, 34220, Istanbul Turkey
Abstract
A new networking platform has been emerged within the internet world by the development of Web 2.0. By the opportunities of
social media networks, museum staff and visitors with a mutual communication can organize exhibitions together in museums
now. Museum has become a public sphere which reflects the demographical and psychological character of the society. It can be
observed that the audience has a facilitating and encouraging effect on curators and organizers through the social media. On the
other hand, museums provide an informing platform which is indirect, exploratory, volunteering and all-purpose in terms of
knowledge of acquisition. In this respect, museum web sites are remarkable. These web sites are accessible easily by students,
researchers and all people who are internet users. Individuals can create their own social platforms through museum web sites
and ensure communion and mutual communication. Museum web sites and their social networks as a safe online networks
undertake the role as a shielder of cultural content by spreading out the information of society. The presentation of museums’
exhibitions, collections, the news of events and programmes and detailed information about the museums could be shared on
those social media platforms. Moreover, museum staff and the organizer team working with user groups can improve their
strategy according to the visitors’ performance and adapt their projects accordingly. Without a doubt, museums provide visitors
to find their own way of expression and to access information any time and place.
© 2014 European Journal of Research on Education by IASSR.
Keywords: Museum, user, visitor, interactive, social media
1. Introduction
Network-based communication and information technologies as an information organization and the way of their
information sharing have become the current issue in the 21st century. (Ağaoğulları, 2009) By the development of
technology, World Wide Web in the 1990s has undoubtedly provided the connection and communication among
people. The strength of that communication has made connection available anytime eliminating the distance of time
and space. The flow of information and messaging have come to fore as a major domain for the communication. The
user can manage the information to pass on to the cyber world online instantly beyond the time and place. In that
point it is remarkable that the museum spaces as real places turn to be the virtual space by the users. Museums are
the proper places where people of any class get together (Greenhill, 1999). Greenhill points out that museums are
the institutions which provide potentials for social equality carried out through common learning domain. When
considered from this point of view, visitors would be defined as the group of people without noticing the age and
sex. In this study some inferences are recorded making interviews on how the visitors use the social media in
conveying their experiences.
* E-mail address: aynurkaragol@gmail.com
Aynur Karagöl
13
2. Visitor and Social Media
In general term what it means to be the network society is that the society’s usage of global networks within the
intentions of communication, work and management (Anderson, vd., 2006) It could also be said that a network
society occurs by the existence of social media. This new issue constitutes a new social structure of the community.
Castells (2000), emphasizes on the mutability of time and space offering the concepts of ‘time-out’ and ‘space of
flows’.
Along with the development of Web 2.0 a new platform consists of common share in the World Wide Web
emerged. Web 2.0 could also be characterized as the peoples’ interaction on the web. The social media consists of
blogs, video, picture, labelling, friendship requests, forums and messaging along with the social networks (Kelly,
2009).
To give an example for social networks:
- Facebook, LindedIn, eBay that users set off a profile and identify themselves
- Blogs, bloggers and Wordpress
- Video sharing on Youtube
- Photograph sharing on Flickr and Google Images
- Delicious and Digg are some of the prominent social networks that the favourite web sites can be bookmarked.
(Kelly, 2009)
For instance, “Kasteel Heeswijk” was the first museum which had twitter account in July, 2008. Now, more than
%35 of museums have twitter account. (www.leocaillard.com)
It has been seen that by the opportunities of social media networks museums prepare exhibitions by the
cooperation with the project team and visitors in a mutual communication by the opportunities of social media
networks. We could say that the museum is a public space exposing the demographic and psychological character of
the community. It has been observed that through the social media the audience has been interactively facilitating,
promotive and direct effect on the curator and exhibition organizer. On the other hand it could be traced that
museums provide indirect, exploratory, voluntary and multifaceted information domain in terms of learning and
informing. (Simon, 2010)
Personal access has been increasing ever after by the developing technology. Museums creating new platforms
by using social media technologies build up a new world entitled as “social museology”. The rules and rudiments of
that world have become debatable. In this regard, the visitor as an active user is considered as an attendant when
viewed from the producer of the technology.
In other words, visitor turns to be an attendant and contributes all the way along. Simon propounds that people
from experience providers and cultural institutions want to connect to the related communities around the world, and
object-centred institutions promote the inter-mass dialogue with the interpersonal communication providing a
creative and respectful community dialogue. In addition, Simon emphasizes that participator activities could provide
civil learning experience.
Museum web sites should be taken into consideration as those web sites are open to students, researchers and
public that all of the internet users could access. Museum web sites and their social networks as reliable online
networks distribute and spread the information as well as cultural content. For the museum staff, the expositions,
announcements of oncoming programs are available online through the social media network, and it provides
information about the museum and the collection as well as sharing the content out. Moreover, museum team
working with the user groups could develop their strategy and adapt their agenda according to the visitors. Without
doubt museums provide visitors to find their own expression and access information any time and place. Museums
as developing social platforms create the sense of a new world spreading the word around from individuals to the
society. (Walker, 2008) For instance, Science Museum in London gets and credits visitor feedback. According to
Walker (2008) the museum can not only be successful by getting feedbacks from visitors but also by doing that the
parents find it valuable for their children to express themselves in words in those feedbacks.
The museum experience and social media
14
3. The Objection of the Study
This study comprises of analysis acquired data throughout interviewing 7 participators’ traveling experience in
Jerusalem, the city which could be regarded as museum city as those participators are asked to evaluate their visit in
terms of technical, interactive, social and visual experience. In that questionnaire, it is tried to have some inferences
in regard with how the participators use social media in conveying their visiting experience.
4. Interview as a Method of Availability
According to Nielsen, questionnaires and interviews are functional methods in order to understand how the
participators use the system and which features they like or they do not like the most. In terms of availability,
questionnaires and interviews give an idea on utility rather than user interface. In conventional studies, these
methods are defined as the condition that the participators’ answers acquired right after their using the system.
(Root, Draper, 1983)
It is considered that the interview for availability is a well method in order to get the personal views in terms of
recognizing the need at the starting point. It leads up to a fruitful study in the light of interview data clearing the
research questions to be specified and to be examined.
5. Study Group
It is stated that when creating participant group, the individuals should already manage the case which is to be
evaluated with availability. (Dumash and Redish, 1999) Participant group consists of 7 people having higher
education between the ages of 21-34, and 6 of them are female and one of them is male. The participant group was
informed about the research subject before the interview and their permission was received for the tape recording
over the course of the interview.
Table 1. Seven people asked questions in the attachment interviewing after trip the interview is recorded
1. participant 2. participant 3. participant 4. participant 5. participant 6. Participant 7. participant
Age 32
Occupation Restorator
28
Designer
32
Journalist
21
Student
24 34 30
Bank employer Bank employer Technician
Sex Female Female Female Female Female Female Male
Aynur Karagöl
17
6. Findings and Analysis
In the table according to the answers of the participants, it is seen that 3 of them did research before going to the
trip and they used internet as a resource. One of them compares the tour`s programme with the other tours`
programmes through internet. 2 of them expressed that they had no time to do research on the web and one of
them just read the tour programme. This profile demonstrates that about half of the number of participants did
research before going to the trip.
The participants expressed that there were no enough informative materials in the toured places and they did not
able to get more information other than the guide informing. They also expressed that they did not realize any
informative direction on the route in the city. When they were asked to evaluate the directive signboards, one of
them found that signboards were helpful, yet the other one could not even realize those signboards and 5 of them
found that they were insufficient.
In terms of language border, they thought English language was enough in communicating around and for
recognising signboards outside the old city at the route.
Due to the trip tour provides a guide in the journey, the participants regard the guide as the basic information
source for their trip. However when they were asked if they find any informative source in their route, they
respond that they did not able to access any kind of information source and there were almost no name of the
buildings on the signboards.
Participants evaluating their trip in respect of technology, they stated that they did not come across any
technological approach in the city. When they were asked as `Which technological approach could make your
trip more efficient?`, they responded that if they could access visual, audible, and written materials throughout
the visiting, their trip would be much more pleasant.
It is recorded that none of the participant could get online internet connection during the trip, 4 of them found the
personal internet connection expensive and could not use internet network but only they used wi-fi network at the
hotel.
6 of the participants expressed that they used their mobile phones but one of them did not use it much. It could
also be said that the smart phones enables the participants to take photographs and share them on the social
media. During the trip, 5 participants shared photograph, their experience and ideas online as 5 of them used
facebook, 2 of them used instagram and one of them used twitter. Moreover, 4 of the participants said that they
considered to share their experiences over social networks on facebook and blog at the end of their trip.
The question of `which technology could make your trip more fruitful` is responded by the participants as
technological applications such as data matrix, barcode system, cheap internet connection, headphone system
enabling audible narrative by distance, short documentary presentation enabling visual narration, interactive
mobile application for the city tour, animations at the historical places, historical photographs of the places,
kiosks around the buildings to get information, Wi-Fi network connection on the buses and digital leaflets could
make their trip more fruitful.
When the participants asked to evaluate the city in terms of multiculturalism; it is apprehended that Jerusalem is
the centre of divine religions and the city attracts the attentions. However, in the interview they are asked to look
over the city not by the angle of religion-centred view of cultures but different faiths` different way of their lives
and preferences in their cultures, without one of the participants - all expressed that the culture is so rich due to
the various cultures overlap each other, however inside the structure of that “rich” culture, it is also seen as a lack
of toleration among people between each other. Therefore it creates the sense of that while the multiculturalism
generates richness and toleration in other parts of the world, here in that city, it creates the point of clash.
7. Conclusion
Social networks in virtual platforms incorporates “realness” into the virtual space as people sharing their own real
experiences. By sharing the museum experience on the social networks, the user (visitor) on the web is injected to
The museum experience and social media
18
have the desire of “being” in the museum. Therefore, in regard with the museum context, it is provided that the
user`s real identity overlaps with virtual identity. Real experiences regarding events shared on the social platforms
provides benefit on the individuals in respect of getting information. The shared content on the social media
reflecting out to the real world thanks to the interaction with an inter-mass communication could create stimulating
feedbacks in terms of museum, visitor and artist / curator. As a result of the interview with the group of 7 people, it
is seen that they could not access any source in order to get detailed information other than the guide in the museum-
city. It is observed that the individuals are keen to share and to participate on social networking. However it is also
seen that the high price internet tariffs affected the participants negative for the instant sharing online. The
participants, evaluating their trip in terms of technology, adapted their experiences of their own life to the trip. In the
case of evaluating the cultural richness in the journey, the participants comparing with other cultures expressed that
conflict culture overwhelms Jerusalem, yet in case of the social peace is achieved, those different religious and
cultural backgrounds could create the sense of cultural richness.
References
Ağaoğulları, M. (2009). Sosyokültürel Hayata Yön Veren Teknolojik Gelişmeler Paralelinde 21.Yüzyıl Müzeciliği ve Türk Müzeciliği İçin Bir
Değerlendirme, Y. Lisans Tezi, YTÜ, SBE.Sanat ve Tasarım Anasanat Dalı.
Anderson, S. vd. (2006). Dictionary of Media Studies. London: A&C Black.
Castells, M. (2000). Materials for an Exploratory Theory of the Network Society. British Journal of Sociology. Vol. No. 51. Issue No. 1.pp. 5-24.
Dumash, J., and Redish J. (1999). A Practical Guide to Usability Testing, Intellect Books.
Hooper-Greenhill, E., (1999). Müze ve alerı ği ı mı , Translation Meltem rge Evren Emine Gül Kap ı Editor Bekir nur, Ankara
Kelly, L. (2009). The Impact of Social Media on Museum Practice, Paper presented at the National Palace Museum, Taipei, 20 October.
New Trends in Arts, Sports & Science Education. (2012). volume 1, issue
Root, R.W., Draper, S. (1983) Questionnaires as a Software Evaulation Tools, New York.
Simon, N. (2010). The Participatory Museum.
Walker, K. (2008). Structuring Visitor Participation, Digital Technologies and Museum Experience.
"p://www.leocaillard.com/Social Media Metrics for the Cultural Heritage Sector Developing a Prototype, Leiden University Hogeschool Utrecht.
(2011).
Recommended