3 ms·
>it's usually referred to as curation It's also referred to as cronyism and discrimination. Allowing a decision-maker to employ purely subjective criteria is w
by jdietrich 10y ago
>it's usually referred to as curation
It's also referred to as cronyism and discrimination. Allowing a decision-maker to employ purely subjective criteria is wide open to abuse. Without objective standards, that behaviour is impossible to challenge.
- fsloth 10y agoThe problem is that most metrics are quite arbitrary when applied to art. If the objective standard gives equally nonsense numbers for all parties does it provide any added value over cronyism? The latter is obviously unfair, but the former is not necessarily fair but rather arbitrary. Financially art is anyway driven by fads and fashions - it's not science nor is it objectively measurable from any other point except market value.
- jdietrich 10y agoTaken to the nth degree, the meaningless objective evaluation would just be a random number generator - entirely arbitrary, but entirely fair. There's a wholly legitimate argument that arts funding by lottery is better for society than nepotism and cronyism.