Face à Fest

8/2/2019 Face à Fest

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/face-a-fest 1/23

1 Face à Fest

Face à Fest Exploring the Relationship Between Facebook Use and the

Festival Phenomenon.

February 2012

Eric R. Alberts (3485595)

Research Internship (MCMV10016)

MA New Media & Digital Culture

Ann-Sophie Lehmann





3 Face à Fest

Introduction

This study explores the relationship between the festival phenomenon and the usage of

Facebook. On a long term the outcome of this study can help festivals to increase the

efficiency and revenue of their communication and marketing efforts for future editions. On

a short term this study can help to affirm and refute expectations concerning the potential

outcome of the implementation of Facebook by festival organisations. Expectations

concerning digital media in relation to festivals can be traced back to the words of former

director of Theater Instituut Nederland (TIN) Dragan Klaici who formulated the potential of

digital technology for festivals in his article “The Value of Festival Mapping”. Klaic

believes “festivals that are willing to experiment with digital technology [have the prospect

of securing] a significant secondary audience […] in addition to the primary audience

attending live events” (Klaic 2007, 202). Klaic continues by stating, “internet [sic] has

brought an opportunity to sustain audience loyalty and interest between the two yearly

editions” (ibid.). This study finds these words the starting point for further analysis and

narrows the terms ‘Internet’ and ‘digital technology’ down to Social Network Sites (SNSs).

The SNS is an online phenomenon that has well secured its place within the cultural

mainstream. From an academic perspective it is worth noting that there is “a flurry of

academic activity that has already started in the wake of the rise of these highly popular

online phenomenon [and] we are at the crucial moment in the development of this field of

study” (Beer 2008). Although there are many different perspectives from which to

approach SNSs this study stays close to the type of research that examines what people do

with it and who they do it with (Ellison et al. 2011). STRP Festival, one of the largest

indoor art and technology festivals in Europe, has commissioned this study in order to get a

better understanding of how its audience uses SNSs. Hence this study’s focus upon SNS

usage in relation to another proliferating (cultural) phenomenon: the festival. This study

draws on the words of Dragan Klaic when he claims “despite continuous growth of

festivals and evident display of their complexity and diversity, there is surprisingly little

research in the festival phenomena, especially […] comparative attempts are rare” (Klaic

2007, 203). This study does exactly that, comparing two key phenomena, which both have

become important features of urban life in the twenty-first century.

There are several reasons why this study focuses on Facebook instead of other popular

SNSs available today. STRP Festival, for one, has strategically chosen Facebook as their

main channel for online marketing and communication related practices in addition to their

i Dr. Dragan Klaic (1950) was director of TIN from 1992 until 2001. He studied dramaturgy in Belgrade

and received his doctoral from Yale in 1977. He was affiliated with multiple art and culture faculties of universities across Europe. His professional life evolved around Europe and international cooperation.Dragan Klaic passed away in August of 2011.



Eric R. Alberts 4

own website. Facebook, furthermore, is by far the most popular SNS compared to

competitors such as LinkedIn, Twitter and MySpace. Hampton et al., who conducted an

elaborate study into SNSs in relation to American citizen’s daily lives, found almost

everyone they interviewed (92%) uses Facebook. That is why Hampton et al. speak of

Facebook in terms of a “nearly universal social networking site” (Hampton et al. 2011, 13).

Another argument for choosing Facebook lies within its functionalities. Facebook allows

for reciprocal social interaction between users mutually and between users and a festival

within an online platform (i.e. a platform other than the one offered by a (offline) festival).

This reciprocal social interaction is the centre of attention in this study’s exploration of the

relationship between these two phenomena.

Before delving into this relationship, the first chapter, as a start, offers a global overview of

the most significant changes the interpretation of the festival formula has undergone over

the years. This chapter will dwell on the complex situation of the present-day festival and

how it has increasingly become separated from its core celebratory function. The concept

of social capital, which is embedded in all social networks, subsequently offers a way to

comprehend how and why people create and extend social relationships both on Facebook

and during the festival. The second chapter, then, will embed the findings from the

exploration of the relationship between both phenomena within the provided context

offered in the first chapter. The third chapter, finally, offers a case study in which the

theory from the preceding chapters is compared with the results from a survey held among

visitors of STRP Festival to see where differences and similarities between theory and

practice lie. This way all dots between the different chapters get connected, hopefully

offering an overview of the dynamics between the festival phenomenon and Facebook use.

According to Dragan Klaic “festivals could […] lead the engagement with the already

existing digital technology in order to recycle their cultural offers and extend the shelf life

of their products” (Klaic 2007, 203). For festivals to lead the engagement, however, some

theoretical foundation of the dynamics between festivals and Facebook should first be

established. In a time where festival organisations are confronted with large-scale budget

cuts and increasingly rely on public support, thought-through (communication) strategies

are becoming crucial in a festival’s struggle for survival. This study, hopefully, helps

festival organisations in their difficult tasks by offering a theoretical backdrop that can help

to surpass the gap with the new media. Provided they are critically assessed, new digital

media like Facebook can offer opportunities that could steer festival organisations in the

right direction and lighten the burden of their continuous fight for existence.







7 Face à Fest

consultancy rapport commissioned by the Scottish Arts Council, festivalisation is “linked to

the economic restructuring of cities, inter-city competitiveness, and the drive to develop

cities as large-scale platforms for the creation and consumption of ‘cultural experience’”

(AEA Consulting 2006).

Over the last four decades the cultural agenda of public authorities has become intertwined

with economic, political and social agendas. This has cleared the path for festivals to

evolve from merely being a way to display and celebrate the wealth of a city to a “device

that can bring economic as well as social and cultural benefits” (Johansson &

Kociatkiewicz 2011, 387). The present-day festival can act as means to connect cultures

and serve as a platform for intercultural engagement. It has the potential to acquire ahealing function for areas torn by violence or political conflict. It may even “reinforce the

self-confidence of an under-privileged community and celebrate its resourcefulness and

newly found sense of purpose” (Klaic 2002). Whether the present-day festival lives up to

these expectations is open for debate as academic attention to festivals is relatively recent.

Researchers agree, however, that there is an efflorescence of festival culture (Johansson &

Kociatkiewicz 2011; Klaic 2006; Frey 2000) consisting of “an industry that is capable of

generating experiences that are transferable and repeatable” (Küchler et al. 2011, 4).

Present-day festivals “depend on a complex logistic, much cross-marketing, well-

orchestrated fundraising and a synergy of public subsidy, sponsorship and own income”

(Klaic 2006). Festival organisations deal with politics and media looking over their

shoulders, pressuring them with high expectations concerning attendances, ticket sales, and

fundraising. Festivals that appear only once a year or biennially, moreover, struggle with

structural discontinuity in staff and audience loyalty. Public authorities continue to play a

crucial role, as their funding remains essential. They determine how to monitor festivals,

how to evaluate them and why to fund some and others not (ibid.). According to Dragan

Klaic “festivals risk to become battlefields of cross-purpose ambitions and needs, of

divergent if not contrasting interests, generated from politics, economy, media, and distinct

cultural realms” (Klaic 2002). Although festivalisation has the potential to be artistically

innovative, a good way to ensure business and to develop and encourage profit, researchers

do point to the potential risks (Frey 2000; Klaic 2006; Küchler et al. 2011; Kürti 2011) as

the main purpose of festivals has shifted from celebratory to productivity and long-term

profit (Richards & Wilson 2006).

1.3 Double lives in the network society

The changes to the festival phenomenon described above should be seen against the

backdrop of a technological revolution, centred around information, which transformed thepopular events to provide extensive investment in refurbishing the city fabric; expand, albeit temporarily,the market for city output; and leave a permanent stock of physical capital and future growth”.



Eric R. Alberts 8

macro social and macro political contexts that shape social action and human experience

around the world (Castells 1996). We live in a world that is witnessing a revolution in

information technology, a converging set of technologies, which is penetrating all domains

of human activity (ibid.). Although this technological revolution is amplified through

digitisation, or what Nicholas Negroponte refers to as the transformation of atoms into

bytes (Negroponte 1995), the digital age is also becoming a unified environment “in which

computer hardware and software define possibilities for actions and conditions of

expression” (Rieder & Schäfer 2008, 2). The new human condition enables new forms of

participation and collaboration, which converge media production and consumption on a

global scale. Previously set borders between making media and using media continue to

blur (Jenkins 2006, 245).

These macro processes set the conditions for the festival’s future. The continuous flow of

activity, on-going and uninterrupted social processes, and overabundance of meaning in the

network society cause for festival professionals to become increasingly dependant on media

networks (Johansson & Kociatkiewicz 2011, 402; Klaic 2002). The digital age requires

festivals to invest in multi-layered communication strategies, orchestrated media exposure

and sophisticated marketing campaigns, which have superseded rudimentary forms of

publicity (Klaic 2002). In order for festivals to meet the new human condition they need to

acquire double lives. One life is concrete, physical, and contained in time and space. The

other one is virtual and takes place on the Internet and in other media outlets. Acquiring

double lives helps “to overcome the pitfalls of [a festival’s] concentrated, intensive but

inevitably short-lived duration in the never-ending typhoon of cultural production and

distribution” (ibid.).

The latter explains why festivals are becoming more and more active on the Internet,

including SNSs like Facebook. The next chapter will dive into the relationship between the

present-day festival industry and the characteristics of Facebook usage. Before doing so,

this chapter has tried to clarify that “[t]he organized festival of twenty-first century Europe

is in fact light-years away from the picture capture [sic] by Roger Caillois in the first half of

the twentieth century” (Küchler et al. 2011, 11). It should not be very surprising when

similarities between the festival and Facebook are found. People are taken to be an essential

part of festivals and SNSs alike and the memory of both phenomena is expressed through

the relationships they create and reinforce. The proliferation of festival culture known as

festivalisation, however, has led to a festival industry with an ever-decreasing time-span of

funding, a generic attitude to institutional forgetting and a decreasing emphasis on the

fostering of social networks across diverse communities (ibid.). Against this backdrop the

next chapter explores the relationship between the festival phenomenon and specific social

aspects of Facebook use.



9 Face à Fest

2 The relationship between festivals and Facebook

This chapter mostly draws on the influential academic research by Nicole Ellion et al. who

have published multiple articles on SNSs and have closely monitored the growth of

Facebook ever since its birth at Harvard in February of 2004. Drawing mainly on their

research can be considered a limitation to this study’s attempt to explore the relationship

between the festival and Facebook. David Beer, for instance, points to the neglected aspects

of SNSs in Ellison et al.’s research such as “a more political agenda that is more open to the

workings of capitalism” (Beer 2008, 528-529). Research by Ellison et al., however, proves

to be helpful when looking at how communication practices on SNSs impact social capital

outcomes. Their research underscores the importance of what individuals do with Facebook

and whom they do it with (Subrahmanyam et al. 2008; Ellison et al. 2011). The step this

chapter subsequently tries to make is how this usage of Facebook relates to the festival

phenomenon, their visitors and their incentives. As will become clear in this chapter, the

relationship between Facebook and the festival can substantially alter when the

proliferation of festival culture, known as festivalisation, is taken into the equation. Before

elaborating on the relationship between festivals and Facebook it will first be made clear

what SNSs are and give an overview of the specific characteristics of Facebook.

2.1 Defining SNSs and the characteristics of Facebook

SNSs such as Facebook, LinkedIn, Twitter, Google+ and MySpace are “online spaces that

allow individuals to present themselves, articulate their social networks, and establish or

maintain connections with others” (Ellison et al. 2006, 3). More specifically, this study

draws on the following definition of SNS:

[S]ocial network sites [are] web-based services that allow individuals to (1) construct a

public or semi-public profile within an bounded system, (2) articulate a list of other users

with whom they share a connection, and (3) view and traverse their list of connections and

those made by others within the system. The nature and nomenclature of these connections

may vary from site to site. (boyd & Ellison 2008, 211)

Today there is a large amount of SNSs to be found online, all of which have implemented a

wide variety of technical featuresiii. Generally all SNSs make use of so-called profile pages:

unique pages, created by individuals, which display “an articulated list of [friends] who are

also users of the system” (ibid.). After creating a profile on a SNS you are encouraged to

invite others into your network. In Facebook this process is called ‘Friending’, whereby a

‘Friend’ is granted increased access to profile information and more communication

options (Ellison et al. 2011, 876).

iii For a further reading on SNS’s technical features see “Social Network Sites: Definition, History, and

Scolarship” by danah m. boyd and Nicole B. Ellison published in the Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication 13 (2008).



Eric R. Alberts 10

By 2011 Facebook is the second largest site on the Internet. It has more than 800 million

active users of whom more than 50% log on any given day (Facebook.com). Facebook is

far from reaching growth saturation, as the number of unique visitors is still increasing. In

November of 2011 Facebook counted 160 million unique visits, growing 23% year over

year (Compete 2012). Besides Friending users of Facebook have the ability to update their

status, to comment on other users’ statuses and content, to indicate that they like someone’s

content, and to send private messagesiv. Hampton et al. also looked at how much of

Facebook users’ overall network is connected on Facebook and how this network looks

like. On average, an American adult on Facebook has 229 Facebook friends. Compared to

the number of active social ties in people’s overall social networks, the average user hasFriended 48% of his/her total network on Facebook. The largest single group of Facebook

Friends consists of people from high school; the second largest of people from

college/university. The average Facebook user has never met in-person with 7% of his or

her Facebook Friends and an additional 3% are people he or she has met in-person only

once. According to Hampton et al., SNSs are also increasingly used to maintain contact

with close social ties (Hampton et al. 2011).

The numbers and figures above correspond with other research revealing Facebook is used

predominantly for communication among acquaintances and offline contacts than for

connecting with strangers (Ellison et al. 2011; Ellison et al. 2007; Subrahmanyam et al.

2008). Despite Facebook’s technical features that allow for both maintenance of existing

social ties and formation of new connections, Facebook users are primarily communicating

with people who are already part of their existing social network (boyd & Ellison 2008,

211). SNSs are distinctive objects because they enable users to articulate and make visible

their existing social network. This distinguishes SNSs from the first online communities,

which were supposed to do the opposite: liberating individuals from their pre-existing

social group or location, bringing together people based on shared interests instead of

shared geography (Rheingold 2000; Wellman et al. 1996). Earlier virtual communities

therefore largely facilitated meetings between individuals with no previous offline

connection.

Regarding Facebook merely as a platform for transferring offline social relationships to an

online environment does not fully capture the overlapping nature of online and offline

interactions. Rather than conceptualising online and offline social networks as dichotomous

and mutually exclusive constructs, they should be considered as permeable, intertwined

networks. Social networks are diffuse with overlapping social and spatial boundaries. SNSs

iv For further reading on the demographics of SNSs and what people do on Facebook in the U.S. see

Social Networking Sites and Our Lives (2011) by Keith Hampton et al.



11 Face à Fest

are a part of people’s social network, rather than being a separate set of relationships

(Haythornewaite & Wellman 2002). With the help of SNSs people maintain and expand

social relationships that enhance their communication ability (Lee & Lee 2010, 720-721).

SNSs like Facebook do, however, contain many technical affordances that could be used to

create new social connections. In addition to the maintenance and expansion of social

relationships, Facebook and other present-day SNSs are structured to facilitate meetings

with new individuals as well (Ellison et al. 2006, 5).

Keith Hampton et al. discovered “11% of Facebook users report having more Facebook

Friends than their estimated overall network size” (Hampton et al. 2011, 25). This suggests

users do use Facebook to get in contact with people outside their existing social network.According to Hampton et al. an explanation for this trend is that some Facebook Friends

are ‘dormant ties’, social ties that were once important and active in someone’s network but

for various reasons have become dormant (ibid.). Much in line with this hypothesis is the

outcome of research conducted by Ellison et al. They found that Facebook users convert

‘latent ties’ (connections that are technically possible but not yet activated socially) into

‘weak ties’ (Ellison et al. 2007; 2011). Facebook users tap into dormant/latent/weak ties

because they might provide useful information or new perspectives, but typically not

emotional support (Ellison et al. 2006, 8). This distinction between weak and strong ties is

closely linked to the distinction between ‘bridging’ and ‘bonding’ social capital popularised

by Robert Putnam in his book Bowling Alone (2000). Bridging social capital refers to loose

connections (e.g. acquaintances) and bonding social capital refers to strong emotional ties

(e.g. family and close friends) (Ellison et al. 2006, 8-9).

2.2 Social capital, creating social networks, and consuming familiarity

The concept of social capital is used in multiple fields of research and is therefore difficult

to define. The general consensus, however, is that social capital refers to the benefits

individuals derive from their social relationships and interactions (Steinfield et al. 2008;

Ellison et al. 2006; Ellison et al. 2007; Ellison et al. 2011; Lee & Lee 2010). Social capital

can literally be understood as a form of capital (like financial capital) that is embedded in

the structure of all social networks (Ellison et al. 2011, 875). The social and technical

affordances provided by Facebook play an important role in helping users maintain,

expand, and create social relationships and the social capital that is embedded within them

(889). The concept of social capital, then, helps to explain why people tap into latent ties on

Facebook, as these ‘Friends’ might become “useful recourses for providing individuals

with a window into a diverse set of perspectives and information” (ibid.). These findings

indicate, moreover, that users differentiate between ‘actual’ friends and ‘Facebook

Friends’.



Eric R. Alberts 12

Similarities with this use of Facebook can be found by looking at the festival phenomenon

from the concept of social capital. Robert Cantwell, for instance, suggests a festival also

“generate[s] its own community” (Cantwell 1991, 150). Latent ties between scholars,

workers, local people, volunteers and artists are activated during the organisation of the

festival and during the festival itself. The creation of this new community (i.e. social

network) can be seen as individuals tapping into potential useful resources for providing a

diverse set of perspectives and information. According to Cantwell the festival can be seen

as “a kind of morale-builder; it strengthens the self-esteem” (ibid.) suggesting individuals

derive benefits (social capital) from social relationships and interactions established during

the festival. Similarly, Ellison et al. found a link between intensive Facebook use and low

self-esteem indicating, “Facebook use may be helping to overcome barriers by studentswho have […] low self-esteem” (Ellison et al. 2007, 1163). Robert Cantwell continues by

stating that the festival holds open the possibility of emergent, non-predictable cultural

creation, something that coincides with Facebook’s technical affordances, which hold the

possibility of non-predictable creation of new social connections.

Facebook and festivals both offer opportunities to create new social ties or networks. This

similarity, however, does not necessarily set the festival’s relationship with Facebook apart

from the one it could have with other (early) virtual communities preceding SNSs. One

may assume that festivals rather bring people together based on shared interests than based

on shared geography. It is likely, then, that festivals (just like virtual communities did)

largely facilitate meetings (i.e. create social relationships) especially between individuals

with no previous connection. One could state that the festival shows more overlap with an

early online community than with Facebook since SNSs are largely used for

communication among existing social networks. The assumption that festivals largely

facilitate meeting between people with no previous connection, however, is refuted by

research on the way people ‘consume’ festivals.

Richard Prentice and Vivien Andersen found socialisation and gregariousness to be

prominent incentives for attending the Edinburgh festival. They found that the festival “is

frequently somewhere to be with friends, rather than somewhere to meet new people”

(Prentice & Andersen 2003, 24). The Edinburgh Festival appears to be a place for “the

consumption of familiarity rather than difference” (ibid.). This coincides with the

observation that Facebook is used predominantly for communication among acquaintances

and offline contacts than for connecting with strangers. Empirical research by Ellison et al.

found a robust connection between Facebook usage and indicators of social capital

suggesting how Facebook “help[s] maintain relations as people move from one offline

community to another” (Ellison et al. 2007, 1164). Juxtaposing visitation incentives of the

Edinburgh festival with Facebook usage reveals greater overlap is found in the fact that



13 Face à Fest

people ‘consume’ both phenomena for maintaining and extending social ties rather than for

creating social ties.

Research refutes the assumption that festivals and Facebook are visited more for meeting

new people than for catching up with friends. Although festivals and Facebook both tend to

be consumed more for familiarity than difference, individuals do tap into dormant and

weak ties for (future) social benefits. People with low self-esteem, for instance, may gain

substantial social benefits from new social connections. The festival and Facebook both

share bridging and bonding dimensions of social capital, although they are not equally

divided over both phenomena. Facebook is used primarily for bridging social capital

(keeping in touch with old friends) and less for bonding social capital (close friends andfamily), as the affordances of Facebook do not necessarily encourage the creation of close

kinds of relationships (Ellison et al. 2007). The festival, on the other hand, celebrates and

reinforces existing social and cultural relationships associated with bonding social capital

as festivals play an important role in creating trust and cohesiveness among community

members (Gursoy et al. 2004).

2.3 The modern festival, social discord, and differences with Facebook

In the comparison between the festival and Facebook above there is an important actor left

out of the equation: the proliferation of festival culture known as festivalisation (see chapter

1). As it has been made clear in the preceding paragraph, the festival and Facebook in their

essence share common ground. In order to get firmer grasp of the relationship between the

present-day festival and Facebook use, however, festivalisation needs to be taken into

consideration as well. A good example why this is important becomes clear when looking

at Susanne Küchler and Rosella Lo Conte’s comparison of festivals in two London

boroughs. Festivals in the East End, a neighbourhood where people always have both

worked and lived, appeared to be organised by outside charities, private bodies and

organisations, rather than by community-based organisations. Festivals in Wandsworth,

popular with young professionals, did have community-based involvement and lacked

public funding. What they found was that the massively funded festivals intended to bring

people together, hardly helped to overcome the history of segregation in the East End

(Küchler & Lo Conte 2011). Perhaps more salient is that Küchler and Lo Conte discovered

public funding of festivals to be one of the root causes of social fragmentation and

disintegration in an inner city neighbourhood (191).

Drawing on Küchler and Lo Conte’s findings, public funding of festival culture intended to

bring people together risks causing counterproductive effects, as it tends to “enhance the

social and economic fault-lines that divide the urban setting” (192). Adding the

proliferation of festival culture to the equation, thus, disrupts the picture outlined in the



Eric R. Alberts 14

preceding paragraph. Rather than creating and reinforcing social relationships or creating

trust and cohesiveness among community members the festival industry produces social

discord and ghettoization (Küchler et al. 2011, 11-12). This image of the festival,

obviously, does not coincide with the image of Facebook use outlined above. It remains

uncertain whether the use of Facebook is able to replace the festival in creating trust and

cohesiveness among offline communities. Although Facebook’s technical affordances can

be beneficial (e.g. for those who have difficulties forming and maintaining relationships)

(Steinfield et al. 2008, 444), research lacks substantiation that these affordances are also

beneficial for offline social activities (Brandtzæg & Nov 2011, 457). A study of SNS

BlackPlanet, for instance, reveals how lively discussions about black community issues did

not move beyond an online discursive level of civic engagement (Byrne 2008, 336).

Festivals are events contained by time and space, separated from the continuous flow of

information provided by the digital environment of Facebook. The festival temporarily

provides “physical spaces for groups of people to enact their sense of belonging” (Beynon

2011, 214) and “a concentration, an experiential intensity in an otherwise fragmented and

diversified world” (ibid.). Festivals of today are not only contained by time and space, they

are even clearly separated from the everyday experience of the city and present a sanitized,

healthy picture of the city rather than city life in all its complexity and multiplicity

(Johansson & Kociatkiewicz 2011, 402). Festivals, furthermore, require active and full-

body participation and get people involved by forcing them to step outside their homes

(Küchler et al. 2011, 7) thereby providing “collective experiences of what otherwise may

only be experienced individually and fragmentarily” (Beynon 2011, 214). These aspects

cannot be adequately provided by electronic means.

Drawing on the latter aspects, the festival and Facebook appear to be separated phenomena.

The festival is a temporary event bound by time and space, which offers certain elements

(e.g. live performances) that require full-body participation. This suggests an unbridgeable

dichotomy between an online and offline phenomenon on a material level. This chapter has

made an effort to evade such a pitfall by mainly focussing on the relationship between the

two phenomena on a social level. This exploration has revealed how the festival and

Facebook both offer opportunities for creating, re-establishing, maintaining, and

reinforcing social connections that are sources for bridging and bonding social capital. As

the next chapter will show, the social aspects between the festival and Facebook are also

more entwined rather than clearly separated from each other. The overview of the

relationship between the festival and Facebook offered in this chapter is not fixed. The

relationship might easily become unstable when intensive public involvement and other

aspects of festivalisation are taken into consideration as well. Festivalisation may run the



15 Face à Fest

risk of creating social disintegration and fragmentation. Potential beneficial social aspects

contributed to the festival disappear, rendering the festival socially counterproductive.

3 Case study: STRP Festival and Facebook use

This chapter offers a case study of Facebook use by visitors of a particular festival to delve

deeper into the relationship between the festival and Facebook use and to see whether the

theoretic framework offered by the previous chapters can be supported. For the benefit of

this case study a survey was conducted among visitors of STRP Festival v . Several

volunteers were deployed asking people attending STRP Festival for their email address.

These people received an email containing a link to the online survey a few days later. In

total 382 people completed the survey, which could be filled out either in Dutch or in

English. The survey contained, among other things, a section asking people about their use

of Facebook in relation to the festival. This chapter draws on these and other survey

outcomes to make claims about the relationship between STRP Festival and Facebook use.

An important limitation to this case study is the fact that it looks at one particular festival

bearing many similarities with the characteristics of festivalisation (an elaboration follows

in the upcoming paragraphs). Future research, hopefully, will also explore the relationship

between a festival free from public investment and Facebook to see whether it offers

similar results.

3.1 The city of Eindhoven, festival policy, and STRP Festival

STRP Festival is one of the largest indoor music, art and technology festivals in Europe.

The name refers to the former industrial area Strijp-S in Eindhoven, which used to be the

home ground of electronics multinational Philips. In November of 2011 the festival

celebrated its fifth anniversary in one of Philips’ former factories the Klokgebouw. Spread

over ten days, the festival presented an interactive retrospective of fifty years Dutch media

and technological art and featured a music line-up of well-known international performers

and DJs in the weekends. STRP Festival is one of many events that annually take place in

the city of Eindhoven. Ever since Eindhoven was granted the unflattering title ‘most boring

city in the Netherlands’ several years ago, the cultural policy of the city dramatically

shifted to the organisation of large-scale urban events. As a consequence, the image of

Eindhoven significantly improved and in 2007 the city was awarded the title of 3 rd Event

City of the Netherlands by the National Event Awards. The municipality of Eindhoven,

remarkably, was not content with its festival policy and set up an extensive evaluation in

2009 involving festival directors and other stakeholders. The evaluation revealed festivals

v See Resultaten bezoekersonderzoek STRP Festival 2011: Een kwantitatieve meting onder STRP

Festival bezoekers for the complete outcome of the survey.



Eric R. Alberts 16

in Eindhoven are only granted passage when a festival contains a part of Eindhoven’s

‘DNA’ (i.e. a festival must pay attention to either light, design or technology). Examples of

such festivals are outdoor light festival GLOW, and technology orientated STRP Festival

(Quilligan 2011, 66-67).

Investigation of Eindhoven’s cultural policy by Emma Quilligan reveals that festivals

belong to the mobility, environment, sports and events portfolio and do not fall under the

municipality’s cultural policy. This distinction between festivals and culture is an

indication that Eindhoven considers festivals to be a form of tourism rather than culture

(ibid.). Considering festivals to be a form of tourism or simply a tool for the promotion of a

city rather than a substantial aspect of cultural policy corresponds with Dragan Klaic’sdescription of present-day festival culture (see chapter 1 paragraph 2). Besides STRP

Festival’s dependence of municipal support for continuity, the festival has to meet a wide

variety of expectations. Eindhoven longs of an event, on a social level, to focus on

liveability, meetings, and fun between different population groups. On a cultural level it has

to create challenges for new initiatives, remember important events or sustain traditions. On

economical level it has to contribute to a vital urban supply level (ibid.). Emma Quilligan

concludes her analysis of Eindhoven’s festival policy by emphasising how much festivals

stand in service of the municipality rather than acting as independent art forms. The

municipal ‘themes’ (light, design and technology) are leading and are expected to

contribute to the marketing of the city thereby risking a stagnation of festival innovation.

These facets fit the characteristics of festivalisation described in the preceding chapters.

From the analysis of Eindhoven’s festival policy it can be substantiated that STRP Festival

can be characterised as a present-day festival, exposed to and affected by the proliferation

of festival culture. Whether STRP Festival therefore enhances social and economic fault

lines or even causes social discord and ghettoization can only be assumed in the framework

of this case study. What can be derived from the results of the survey held among visitors

of STRP Festival is that it is typically an event to visit with friends and family. Nearly 75%

of the people that were accompanied by others say their company consisted of friends and

family members. When looking at visitation motives, moreover, only 18% say it came to

the festival to network (i.e. meet new people). The three main incentives for visiting STRP

Festival were ‘experience’ (60%), ‘curiosity’ (50%), and ‘program / line-up’ (44%).

Visitors of STRP Festival, thus, are mainly curious for experiencing the festival’s cultural

offerings with close friends and family. Visitors of STRP Festival are much less interested

in creating new social relationships. These results, along with the contextual analysis,

suggest STRP Festival is a typical present-day festival displaying typical social behaviour

similar to a festival like the Edinburgh festival. As the previous chapter has shown, these

social aspects coincide with overall Facebook use.



17 Face à Fest

3.2 Facebook use by STRP Festival and its visitors

In preparation of the 2011 edition the STRP Festival organisation aimed high at the use of

SNSs, especially Facebook and Twitter. As a result the number of people that ‘liked’ the

Facebook Pagevi of the festival jumped from about 3000 to approximately 7500 at the time

the festival took place. 45% of the visitors indicate it saw STRP Festival’s social media

messages, which is an increase of 14% compared to the year before. Out of all eleven

communication channels used to promote the festival social media messages came in third,

right behind the website (78%) and the posters (67%). Out of 41% indicating one or more

means of communication encouraged him or her to visit the festival, furthermore, 10%

points to social media messages as primary motivator. This makes SNSs the third most

important motivator for festival attendance. Next to the festival’s website and its offlinepromotional activities, SNSs, then, offer an additional valuable way to generate attention

for STRP Festival. These findings corroborate the words of Dragan Klaic when he states

festivals have become increasingly dependant on media networks (Klaic 2002). In other

words, STRP Festival has done well in acquiring a virtual double life.

The marketing and communication department of STRP Festival put a lot of effort in

actively making use of Facebook’s technical affordances. Facebook Pages, for instance,

offers companies, institutions and festivals alike an easy and low-budget opportunity to get

in contact with audiences. In hindsight, STRP Festival was able to more than double its

Facebook audience in a relatively short period of timevii. An explanation for this success

can be found when looking at how and when STRP Festival uses Facebook. Visitors who

‘liked’ STRP Festival’s Facebook Page were asked to assess the festival’s Facebook use.

Although there is room for improvement, the vast majority finds the festival’s usage of

Facebook to be good on all six levelsviii. The majority (39%), furthermore, enjoys the fact

that everyone can post a message on STRP Festival’s ‘Wall’ix. Visitors appreciate the

festival’s overall use of Facebook and find their activities on the SNS to be a good

supplement to the festival’s official website (more than 60% agrees with this).

The timing of the festival’s Facebook activities matches the period wherein people tend to

visit the festival’s Facebook Page. More than 50% states their visits are the highest in the

vi

Facebook Pages are for organisations, businesses, celebrities and brands to broadcast information in

an official, public manner to people who choose to connect with them. For more information onFacebook Pages see http://www.facebook.com/help?page=262355163822084. The url to STRPFestival’s Facebook Page is http://www.facebook.com/strpfestival.vii The author observed STRP Festival’s Facebook activities on a daily basis from the first of September

to the end of November.viii People were asked to assess STRP Festival’s Facebook use on six levels: The frequency with which

messages are posted, the diversity of messages (e.g. photos, videos, polls etc.), the diversity in content(e.g. prize contests, announcements etc.), the use of @mentions (i.e. referrals to others on Facebook),the overall content of the messages, and the overall usage of Facebook.ix A ‘wall’ is the common name for the place where people can post messages, photos and/or links.

Many people or companies that own a Facebook page choose to disable this functionality as it is proneto unwanted messages (spam) and requires moderation and maintenance on a regular basis. STRPFestival chooses to keep this functionality active but does remove unwanted and inappropriate posts.



Eric R. Alberts 18

week just before the festival. This suggests the number of visits to the festival’s Facebook

Page are directly linked to the frequency with which the festival posts new messages. This

suggestion can be substantiated when looking at the months in between festival editions.

From December through approximately August the festival seldom posts anything to

Facebook. Not surprisingly, none of the visitors indicates their visits to the Facebook Page

are the highest the months in between festival editions. Dragan Klaic states that festivals,

which appear on a yearly basis, could lead the engagement with digital technology by

“offering a continuous flow of information, news, and special experiences, real or virtual”

(Klaic 2002). This statement is substantiated by 40% of visitors indicating they will visit

the Facebook Page more often when STRP Festival chooses to post messages on a regular

basis in between festival editions. Here STRP Festival still has room to increase and tosustain audience loyalty and interest.

3.3 Discussing the relationship between STRP Festival and Facebook use

The survey held among its visitors reveals how STRP Festival has successfully embedded

Facebook within its marketing and communication efforts. The festival manages to mould

Facebook into an additional communication channel, which is used to the overall

satisfaction of the festival’s audience. There, however, still is room for improvement on

certain levels of usage and the festival has not yet chosen to utilise Facebook’s affordances

in between festival editions. STRP Festival has relatively late chosen to seriously bring

Facebook into its marketing mix, thereby not yet fully profiting from the potentially good

interaction between its festival and Facebook. The results from the survey lead to the

observation that STRP Festival and Facebook work well together. Delving deeper into the

relationship between STRP Festival and Facebook provides an explanation why this

combination works so well. The relationship becomes beneficial not because they

complement each other but because the way visitors behave at STRP Festival is mirrored in

the way people use Facebook in relation to the festival.

STRP Festival is highly dependent of unclear public policy and is pushed towards city

marketing and tourism instead of culture and art. From the theory on festivalisation, these

aspects tend to overshadow a festival’s celebratory function, supplant community-based

remembering, and could lead to a decreasing emphasis on the fostering of social networks

across communities. STRP Festival yields the question whether its memory is able to

outlasts its funding (Küchler et al. 2011). One might expect that a festival showing this

much characteristics of festivalisation hardly resembles any elements of typical Facebook

use. The survey held among STRP Festival visitors, however, rather reveals overlap

between the social aspects of the festival and the way people use Facebook in relation to

the festival. Visitors indicate they attend the festival with family and friends rather than to

meet new people. Similarly, when asked if visitors gained new Facebook Friends thanks to



19 Face à Fest

the STRP Festival Facebook Page 87% says no. When askes if visitors learned about STRP

Festival through their Facebook Friends 82% says no.

Visitors of STRP Festival who are also Facebook users are quite reluctant in carrying out

the festival amongst their Facebook Friends: only 30% says they introduced STRP Festival

to his or her Facebook Friends. Merely 15%, furthermore, indicates they commonly ‘Share’

STRP Festival’s Facebook messages on their own ‘Wall’. Although STRP Festival

regularly links to other festivals and despite the given that more than half of STRP Festival

visitors follow a lot of other festivals on Facebook, only 6% states they learned about other

festivals through STRP Festival’s Facebook Page. These survey results show little

crosspollination taking place between social networks. Despite Facebook’s and a festival’spotential to create new social ties, people are reticent in extending their social networks and

prefer to stay within their existing social network. On a social level, individuals behave in

similar fashion online they way they behave during the festival. STRP Festival should see

their audience’s Facebook use entwined with social behaviour during their festival, not

separated from each other. As Haythornthwaite and Wellman indicate, SNSs are a part of

people’s everyday lives, rather than being a separate set of relationships. This case study

uncovers the overlapping nature of social interactions between both phenomena.

Conclusion

The case study of STRP Festival along with the theoretical framework provided in the first

two chapters hopefully offer some handles to comprehend the relationship between two key

phenomena, which both have become important features of urban life in the twenty-first

century. This study explores the relationship between the festival and Facebook usage in

order to establish a foundation for future implementation of Facebook by festival

organisations. In a network society that is increasingly relying on digital technology

festivals could play a leading role by aptly employing its affordances to secure a significant

secondary audience in addition to the primary audience attending their events. For festivals

like STRP Festival that appear once a year, SNSs like Facebook bring an opportunity to

sustain audience loyalty and interest in the period between editions. In order to increase the

yield of a festival’s investment in Facebook an overview of the relationship between

festivals and Facebook should be established. This study has tried to do this by

contextualising the festival phenomenon, setting festival and Facebook characteristics side

by side, and by offering a case study in which its theory is put to the test.

The interpretation of what a festival is and should be has changed significantly since the

phenomenon was officiously established in the nineteenth century. The organised festival



Eric R. Alberts 20

of the twenty-first century, which has become firmly embedded in the policies of European

cities, has evolved from being a way to display and celebrate the wealth of a city to a

device expected to bring a wide variety of benefits. Ever increasing expectations have led

to an efflorescence of festival culture, known as festivalisation, typified by its transferable

and repeatable experiences. The festival has morphed into an adequate tool for meeting

tourism and city marketing ends but runs the risk of neglecting original creative, artistic and

celebratory purposes for the sake of productivity and long-term profit. Besides highly

depending on public institutions for financial support, festival organisations are

increasingly becoming reliant of media networks. This explains why festivals are becoming

more and more active on the Internet including SNSs like Facebook.

From multiple studies can be derived that Facebook is predominantly used for

communication among acquaintances, family members, and close friends rather than for

connecting with strangers. Facebook enables users to articulate and make visible their

existing social network. Although Facebook is primarily used to enhance and sustain

existing social relationships, users do wield its many technical features to create new social

ties. From the concept of social capital, which is embedded in all social networks, can be

explained that individual taps into latent ties because they might prove to be beneficial in

the future. On first sight Facebook and the festival may appear distinct phenomena as

festivals provide elements that Facebook cannot (e.g. live performances, experience, full

body participation etc.). The concept of social capital, however, helps to uncover that the

festival and Facebook both offer opportunities for creating and re-establishing social

connections that are sources for bridging and bonding social capital.

The STRP Festival case study reveals that people this festival predominantly with friends

and family members, pushing the desire to create or re-establish social connections into the

background. This corroborates with the way people predominantly use Facebook. Survey

results reveal visitors of STRP Festival indeed show the same overall social behaviour as

they do on Facebook. The festival is attended and Facebook is used primarily for

maintaining and reinforcing existing social connections. Theory suggests this relationship

may easily change when potential risks of festivalisation are taken into consideration.

Analysis of STRP Festival’s context shows how much of the festival’s existence relies on

municipal support. Research by Dragan Klaic and Küchler and Lo Conte warns us that such

public involvement can render a festival counterproductive, causing social disintegration,

fragmentation, and even ghettoization. This image of the festival, then, does not coincide

with typical Facebook use.

The STRP Festival case study is not intended to argue whether the festival causes negative

social effects or not. It is rather intended to emphasise that the festival organisation should



21 Face à Fest

see their audience’s Facebook use entwined with their behaviour at the festival, not as

dichotomous mutually exclusive constructs. Visitors of STRP Festival stay within their

own existing social network, hardly displaying any form of bridging social capital. Little

crosspollination takes place between social networks both online and offline, suggesting

social behaviour is reflected in the way festival visitors use Facebook in relation to the

festival and vice versa. The STRP Festival case study reveals people are reticent in

extending their social networks despite the potential of Facebook and the festival to create

new social ties. The outcome of the case study leads to the recommendation to first

contextualise a festival and flesh out visitor’s social behaviour before contemplating the

implementation of Facebook for any kind of purpose. If festival organisations want to lead

the engagement by sustaining audience loyalty with the help of SNSs, they should take theoverlapping nature of interactions between Facebook and the festival into account.

Facebook is a part of people’s everyday lives, not a separate set of relationships.

References

AEA Consulting. “Thundering Hooves: Maintaining the Global Competitive Edge of Edinburgh’s

Festivals.” Report commissioned by the Scottish Arts Council. 2006.

Beer, David. “Social Network(ing) Sites… Revisiting the Story So Far: A Response to danah boyd &

Nicole Ellison.” Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication 13 (2008): 516-529.

Beynon, David. “Festivals and Music: Negotiating Culture, Identity and Place.” Every Day’s a

Festival!: Diversity on Show. Eds. Susanne Küchler, László Kürti and Hisham Elkadi. Wantage:

Sean Kingston Publishing, 2011. 195-218.

boyd, danah m. and Nicole B. Ellison. “Social Network Sites: Definition, History, and Scholarship.”

Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication 13 (2008): 210-230.

Brandtzæg, Petter Bae and Oded Nov. “Facebook Use and Social Capital – A Longitudinal Study.”

Proceedings of the Fifth International AAAI Conference on Weblogs and Social Media (2011):

454-457.

Byrne, Dara N. “Public Discourse, Community Concerns, and Civic Engagement: Exploring Black

Social Networking Traditions on BlackPlanet.com.” Journal of Computer-Mediated

Communication 13 (2008): 319-340.

Cantwell, Robert. “Conjuring Culture: Ideology and Magic in the Festival of American Folklife.” The

Journal of American Folklore 104.412 (1991): 148-163.

Castells, Manuel. The Information Age: Economy, Society and Culture. Malden MA: Blackwell, 3

volumes, first published in 1996.

Compete. “The State of Social Media: First Edition.” Report of Social Media based on US Internet browser population only. 2012.



Eric R. Alberts 22

Ellison, Nicole B. et al. “Spatially Bounded Online Social Networks and Social Capital.” Paper

presented at the Annual Conference of the International Communication Association. Dresden:

2006.

Ellison, Nicole B. et al. “The Benefits of Facebook “Friends”: Social Capital and College Students’

Use of Online Social Network Sites.” Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication 12 (2007):

1143-1168.

Ellison, Nicole B. et al. “Connection Strategies: Social Capital Implications of Facebook-enabled

Communication Practices.” New Media Society 13.6 (2011): 873-892.

Frey, Bruno S. “The Rise and Fall of Festivals: Reflections on the Salzburg Festival.” Working Paper

Series by the Institute for Empirical Research in Economics . Zurich: University of Zurich, 2000.

Gursoy, Dogan et al. “Perceived Impacts of Festivals and Special Events by Organizers: An

Extension and Validation.” Tourist Management 25 (2004): 171-181.

Hampton, Keith H. et al. Social Networking Sites and Our Lives: How People’s Trust, Personal

Relationships, and Civic and Political Involvement are Connected to their Use of Social

Networking Sites and Other Technologies. Washington: Pew Research Centre’s Internet &

American Life Project, 2011.

Haythornthwaite, Caroline and Barry Wellman. “The Internet in Everyday Life: An Introduction.”

The Internet in Everyday Life. Eds. Barry Wellman and Caroline Haythornthwaite. Oxford:

Blackwell Publishers, 2002. 3-44.

Jenkins, Henry. Convergence Culture: Where Old and New Media Collide. New York: New York

UP, 2006.

Johansson, Marjana and Jerzy Kociatkiewicz. “City Festivals: Creativity and Control in Staged Urban

Experiences.” European Urban and Regional Studies 18.4 (2011): 392-405.

Klaic, Dragan. “The Future of Festival Formulae.” Background Paper Holland Festival Symposium.

Amsterdam: 2002.

Klaic, Dragan. “The Value of Festival Mapping.” Helsinki - A Festival City: The Development,

Actors and Audiences of Urban Festival Culture. Ed. Satu Silvanto. Helsinki: The City of

Helsinki Urban Facts and The City of Helsinki Cultural Office, 2007. 202-205.

Klaic, Dragan. “Festival.” Performance Research 4.11 (2006): 54-55.

Küchler, Susanne et al. “Festivals: An Introduction.” Every Day’s a Festival!: Diversity on Show.

Eds. Susanne Küchler, László Kürti and Hisham Elkadi. Wantage: Sean Kingston Publishing,

2011. 1-18.

Küchler, Susanne and Rosella Lo Conte. “Mapping Festivals in London.” Every Day’s a Festival!:

Diversity on Show. Eds. Susanne Küchler, László Kürti and Hisham Elkadi. Wantage: Sean

Kingston Publishing, 2011. 169-194.

Kürti, László. “The Politics of Festivals: Fantasies and Feasts in Hungary.” Every Day’s a Festival!:

Diversity on Show. Eds. Susanne Küchler, László Kürti and Hisham Elkadi. Wantage: Sean

Kingston Publishing, 2011. 53-82.

Lee, Junghee and Hyunjoo Lee. “The Computer-Mediated Communication Network: Exploring the

Linkage Between the Online Community and Social Capital.” New Media Society 12 (2010): 711-

727.



23 Face à Fest

Negroponte, Nicholas P. Being Digital. New York: Vintage Books, 1995.

Prentice, Richard and Vivien Andersen. “Festival As Creative Destination.” Annals of Tourism

Research 30.1 (2003): 7-30.

Putnam, Robert D. Bowling Alone: The Collapse and Revival of American Community. New York:

Simon & Schuster, 2000.

Quilligan, Emma. Waardevolle festivals? Onderzoek naar de artistieke, culturele, sociale en

economische betekenis van kunstfestivals voor een stad of regio’s in Nederland. MA thesis

Kunsten, Cultuur en Media. Rijksuniversiteit Groningen, 2011.

Quinn, Bernadette. “Arts Festivals and the City.” Urban Studies 42.5-6 (2005): 927-943.

Rheingold, Howard. The Virtual Community: Homesteading on the Electronic Frontier. Cambridge

MA: The MIT Press, 2000.

Richards, Greg and Julie Wilson. “Developing Creativity in Tourist Experiences: A Solution to the

Serial Reproduction of Culture?” Tourist Management 27 (2006): 1209-1223.

Rieder, Bernhard and Mirko T. Schäfer. “Beyond Engineering: Software Design as Bridge over the

Culture/Technology Dichotomy.” Philosophy and Design. Eds. Pieter E. Vermaas et al. Springer,

2008.

“Statistics.” Facebook.com. 31 Jan. 2012.

<http://www.facebook.com/press/info.php?statistics>.

Steinfield, Charles et al. “Social Capital, Self-Esteem, and Use of Online Social Network Sites: ALongitudinal Analysis.” Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology 29 (2008): 434-445.

Subrahmanyam, Kaveri et al. “Online and Offline Social Networks: Use of Social Networking Sites

by Emerging Adults.” Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology 29 (2008): 420-433.

Wellman, B. et al. “Computer Networks as Social Networks: Collaborative Work, Telework, and

Virtual Community.” Annu. Rev. Sociol. 22 (1996): 213-218.

Documents

Face à Fest