Breaking the Algorithm for Creative Communities
In this episode, B Crittenden and Dr. Brett Crawford speak with Dr. Gigi Johnson, Founder and President of Rethink Next and Executive Director of the Maremel Institute. They discuss the future of music education and virtual learning, emerging business models in the creative industry, and questioning the unquestioned.
Resources
Transcript
[Musical intro, fades out]
B: Hello, AMT Lab listeners, and welcome to an interview episode of Tech in the Arts, the podcast from the Arts Management and Technology Lab. My name is B Crittenden, and I'm the Technology and Interactive Content Manager. In this episode, Dr. Brett Crawford and I speak with Dr. Gigi Johnson, Founder and President of Rethink Next and Executive Director of the Maremel Institute. Maremel describes itself as a "think tank, an educational multimedia producer, a creative tech lab, and an action research partner around social changes and technologies, all wrapped up in one place." They offer programs, classes, and multimedia to help creative leaders and new technology users embrace a bigger, better, smarter life with connected technology. We had an awesome conversation with Dr. Gigi Johnson and we hope you enjoy this episode.
[Musical intro, fades in]
I am here today with my co-host—Faculty Chair of the Arts and Entertainment Management program at Carnegie Mellon University and the Executive Director of the Arts Management and Technology Lab—Dr. Brett Crawford and our guest, Dr. Gigi Johnson. Gigi, could you take a moment to introduce yourself?
Gigi: Wow, it's usually not a moment. There's usually quite a...I tend to put many irons in the fire. So, some people know me as the Executive Director or President of the Maremel Institute, which has been around for about 15 years, and some people know me as President of Rethink Next, which is a fairly new nonprofit that looks at change happening in how we talk about the future and create around it. And some people know me as that co-creator of Amplify Music, which is a crazy endeavor that launched at the beginning of the pandemic to connect people doing great work in the world across the world in music.
B: So you recently led a panel at the 2021 South by Southwest EDU conference called "Tectonic Mergers: Frictions in Music Education." And this was really about how K-12 music education is taught and how we're innovating in this area, especially through the pandemic. One thing you talked about was virtual learning and the challenges and opportunities in this space. Can you talk about those challenges and opportunities that you've observed?
Gigi: So Frank Heuser and I were kind of the co-hosts of that experience, and he is a decades-long leader in music education for K-12. My lens tends to be on the outside of school, looking at all of the programs that were place-based oftentimes that could have been virtual, but we're working with, for example, Los Angeles Unified School District, or we're working in Denver with five different high schools that they were in many ways trying to do a blend of some virtual, but mostly in-person, music education that wasn't the traditional band and orchestra competition-led music education. White Western music education, or as my own now-adult offspring who are now out in the world, the ones who went through band, were oftentimes playing back someone else's music. And so the "What is my music? What is my space? What is my community?" tends to not necessarily be in a lot of K-12 education. So we also had David Sears in the mix from the Grammy organization, and he's been working also with Frank on what's happening on the cutting edge of music education. And for a lot of folks, it was stepping out of that mold. And so, one of my favorite metaphors about the pandemic is we've had five years of change in one: that the stepping into the virtual learning, the non-physically-based platforms, the suddenly everybody—whether you were in K-12 or you were one of the many great organizations bolting on to K-12 or doing after-school programs—suddenly, you needed to shift. And possibly in two weeks, you needed to shift. And you could actually see that happening first in Australia working with Chinese students. That was one of my bellwethers to see there was a massive change afoot. And then you had organizations suddenly flipping. And we started talking with all these organizations who suddenly were virtual. And it wasn't just that, "Oh, woe is me, we need to do this," but suddenly they also became global. So their delivery had been where "we are tied and tethered to physical delivery with a local partner," and suddenly were able to make a massive shift and open their doors wider and step into new spaces for new types of creative arts that they could help their teachers learn to be doing virtual production, helping students build skills, but also able to then have people from all sorts of countries tap them on the shoulder and go, "Would you work with us?" So we started having a really gigantic shift that we were trying to talk about, but in part talk about how it was also challenging the existing model. You know, do you have to deliver in-person traditional pedagogy? I could talk about this part forever because it really is a parallel to a lot of other education, that we've had the whole model where we were teaching and creating and teaching creating, traditionally. And then now that we had a pop over the edge, it makes me, in the moment, think of over-the-top television. You know, that cable was assuming it would have to be in its specific framing and place, and now that you rethink the whole model, do you have to teach what you've been teaching? So, I'm still working with a lot of out-of-school programs that are really rethinking: what is our model? how do we deliver? who is our audience? do we have to deliver locally? And now that we're coming back, what's the new role?
Brett: You've unpacked a lot. Thank you very much.
Gigi: [Laughter] I do that a lot. I'm sorry.
Brett: I love it. I'm in total agreement, but one of the things I've witnessed and also received feedback from students, other patrons, is the issue of social and that that's the feeling—and there's a lot of data to support that—that's lost. But, when you really focus in on music education and music practice, the playing and learning of it, it's very much a social experience and that a lot of young people receive a lot of self worth and identity from that. So, I'm wondering how you saw institutions and the individuals they were serving sort of adapt and meet those demands, or maybe they had some hiccups along the way.
Gigi: A lot of anecdotes to go with that. So, a lot of folks who were used to teaching live local mass suddenly had to see the student. So on one side, you had the student experience—and, again, lots of anecdotes—where there was the ritual and the comfort of coming in, seeing someone else, and not a cognitive load of having to come in to the experience. So, I just show up, I just...I'm there and I do my thing along with other people and there is that resonance of being in-person and you break a lot of those habits, roles, and comfort elements. What a lot of teachers we talked to had experienced, you now actually received the individual student, and oftentimes, it was the, "Well, I was teaching, you know, I might be working with the percussion section, but I'm not having to think about Joe as an individual." But at the same time, you could, depending on how you structured the experience, you could actually have different ways of listening and seeing what they are doing. People already were teaching on an individual basis. I think of some great conversations with Arturo O'Farrill, who I adore. He's one of our faculty at UCLA, where I also have been teaching. He just got his, I think, fifth Grammy. Phenomenal jazz pianist but also phenomenal jazz piano teacher. For him, it was...he already was teaching individually, and it was the feeling in the room was gone. The feeling of watching and hearing, almost, the air under the fingers and being able to see angle and attack that you can't...yeah, you can set up three cameras in some poor student's room, but you're really missing that tactile part of the experience. So he had to find other ways to kind of find different engagement and have a different conversation in a different language. For the faculty who were teaching large ensembles, it really is almost rethinking the premise of what they were doing and whose music and scale and what students needed to know. And I know that for UCLA's own program, they created micro-classes to re-skill and so that you could take little slices of things, which had no time in a very busy curriculum, to bring new modalities of learning. And so it wasn't trying to replace ensemble work. In fact, that, I think, really fragmented this year for most people, even with whatever technologies they tried to bring in to the table to do synchronous production. But a lot of it is new skilling. But that whole both intimacy of individual learning and the non-verbal, tactile, observational, pattern observation was really hard to replicate. And then you get to the question: should we be teaching with large ensembles as a primary teaching pattern and as a norm without questioning it in a normal basis?
Brett: And that's a big opportunity period that I think this year-and-a-half has given us is rethinking or interrogating our assumptions about education and what we inherited versus what's appropriate. And I will say, definitely, that concept of the tactile is something that's lost. We did a review, an article, a few years ago by Lydia Kilian that was analyzing a suit that a student could wear that the teacher could modulate how they were playing the violin. So it was an interesting...it was a distance teaching technology. I can't imagine it was cheap, but I think the energetic exchange that happens is also an aspect of that—both technical but also human or humane.
Gigi: Or even rethinking, back in the classroom, what the defaults are, what we consider the rituals. Are they all adjustable instead of unquestioned, which oftentimes they are. What you just said reminded me though, at South by Southwest back...gosh, five years ago, there was a really great session where they took hexoskin suits and put them on an ensemble. And then as part of the visuals of it also were watching the biometrics that went with the music. So in many ways, some of these tools and techniques have been around—you know, virtual learning—for at least a decade, depending on how you look at it. And we haven't thought about the hybridization of it or how to teach or think remotely. I know I've been doing remote classes for at least a decade outside of UCLA. So, how we think about who our students are, where we are, what their physical space is, how we engage, what...do we have to be having a local live business model. You know, sort of, what's the combination of things that can be put together.
Brett: It's so exciting in so many ways. You know, the opportunities are endless.
B: Going off of that, you know, as more people are getting vaccinated, in-person programming is kind of starting up again, you hear a lot of people using the phrase "going back to the way things were before the pandemic." And I'm wondering, how do you respond to that phrase and how do you kind of regard that mentality in the scope of arts education?
Gigi: I think the jobs people will go into are not going back to the way things were. And I do think the way things were had all sorts of diversity and equity challenges that have come to light a lot this past year. Some of the things I'm looking at is the question of place and space and where people are coming back out to. So the concept of that I need to be going to a campus, I need to be planning to go to a physically-embedded job, and that I don't need to know all of these engaged digital skills, comes to question. The other thing, which I think the past year brought to light, is that your average person, no matter what the age, has sucky tech skills. And that includes digital natives. And I talked to my 20-something students a lot to the, people will assume you can actually use tech skills coming out of a university environment, not just be a consumer of tech products. And being able to do basic data digestion, production, to be just coming out just as an artist that isn't figuring out how to be digitally engaged and embedded, that doesn't understand themselves as a business live and on the web, to be just teaching the creative art for its own sake without thinking about the world it's going into, I think, is an interesting challenge that gets woken up now. I love questioning the unquestioned and the fact that we were doing things that way they were, I think, yes, people might be going back to venues and events, but what can we crack open from the new things that we've done and learned? And I think that just saying, "I'm going to expect to go back to the same event space, performance opportunities," I think that's going to be a challenge. And I do think that we can rethink the place of all of this stuff. And I think that some people want to just go back to the old. A non-arts metaphor: go back to the same restaurants they were before in a world where ghost kitchens have exploded so that you don't need a physical space to get food because of the whole pickup and delivery model. What are the other models of arts creativity and delivery and all of that that are out there? And I'm worried in some ways about the amount of money that's come in on a one-time basis. What will be the funding models going forward after we've kind of sucked the well dry, potentially, for future funding? And how do we really think about what models we're preparing young people to go into with the arts? I think the opportunity used to be much more of a creative entrepreneur and look at new ways of delivering. We've been possibly training artists without thinking about what the work of the future is for them. And so, are we preparing young creators to be entrepreneurs, business, understanding their own intellectual property and their rights? And oftentimes, I think we're not in most communities and we possibly are overtraining without looking at how we help them build careers and businesses that are sustainable or have diverse income streams, etcetera. I'm not sure higher ed has thought about this as much. Other than in the United States, at least, we have a precipitous cliff coming of the number of people coming into college because of the reverse baby boom of 2007-2008 that we're going to be having probably less demand for people coming in to the academy for this stuff. And I know for music, a lot of that's already started to drop. And so we're going to be seeing people rethinking how we are going to be attractive for arts education once you're out of K-12, to be competing for a smaller amount of students and probably having to show them and their families how you actually will make money in the arts and be a professional and be a business going forward. You're seeing more arts entrepreneurship programs coming in a means to be able to also connect the dots, as you guys have with a lot of this work.
Brett: You've been focusing very much on sort of the training of the artists, and our program at Carnegie Mellon focuses on training arts managers who are working with those artists. But we see many of the same things, and our program very much focuses on: how do you train for 10 years from now when we don't know what that technology is, other than helping recognize that you need to be adaptable? Which is one of the things I sort of hope will be coming out of this. You've talked a lot about how you like to question assumptions. I'm wondering what you hope for the future in this adaptability, like what things are going to stick for these artists? What things are going to stick for higher education, versus this human need to go back to the way it was? You know, I always think of Walter Benjamin's theories about, we like to watch the same thing, we read the same thing. And, like, how are we making ourselves comfortable with adaptation to change and what do you look forward to?
Gigi: One of the evils I battle all the time is the algorithm. And I do think that I sadly see the challenge that we have a generation who thinks that they're supposed to be fed through algorithms and other people's decisions. So I spend a lot of time breaking that. And what I really hope to see going forward is people saying, "I want to be looking at more of a community and need-based structure." I think that the new models fascinate me and emergent structures and emergent communities fascinate me, and I think this may be taking a different direction than the question, but that coming back to what we're comfortable with, we don't measure the arts and community and society well at all. And we don't have methods yet for taking a look at all of these emergent, multi-modal, multi-platform experiences. So whether you're a civic organization, a funder, a manager...that we still are slivering things into fine and visual arts and music and dance, and we're oftentimes not measuring or looking at all of the new emergent business models and then we're not connecting well with them and teaching them well. One of my areas I'm fascinated in right now are the arts incubator spaces and communities. So it's not a venue, it's not a performing art space. And funders, donors, civic agencies, public policy, doesn't yet know what to do with spaces like 2112 in Chicago, which is a multi-building production, creative, mentoring, education space; Pulp Arts in Gainesville, Florida, which is a creative studio and residency space; The Music District in Fort Collins, Colorado, which is a multi-building, residency, arts, visual arts creative space. We're beginning to have all sorts of new emergent deliveries and communities. And, to me, I really hope in these next five and 10 years that we're going to find new ways that are all sorts of interesting to combine cultural arts and storytelling and habit and community and education. But we're not yet into the sort of multimodal side of it. And then I'd like us to not get stuck in someone's platform. So, right now, we seem to be chasing emergent platforms that are sort of trapping us in their IP spaces, whether it's rushing into TikTok. TikTok's fun. Kind of makes me crazy, but TikTok's fun. Going into spaces where you're coming into someone else's single platform rules and then handing over your creative content to hope they make you famous. There's the sort of interesting ways, and for a lot of people, they don't know what they don't know. They don't know what they don't see, and teaching people how to break the algorithm to look at other things happening in culture and society, I find really important. And that includes at the university side, that we tend to be in our silo and our conceptual silo and our relationship silo, and sort of how we look more blended across. You know, arts management can be many things and training people for different types of engagement. I'm really excited by people who have said, "Okay, I don't see why there's not x and go build it" without thinking, "I have to be creating an arts venue that fits into this grant structure that fits into this space." There's folks who are sort of saying, "Let's not be coming back to the same ritual and spaces we're used to.” We're used to funding. There's all sorts of new places that has me excited. Trying to get these people to meet each other is part of my battle right now.
Brett: You've pointed out some of the forces that I think place and our old definitions of place have been ripped apart, and then we have this desire to go back to place. But also most of our legacy buildings...I mean, I think about music, symphony halls, and that the symphony hall was designed for a completely different society. So how are we going to transition into the world that we live in now, which is multi-platform and smaller spaces and more based on a kind of storytelling that didn't exist then? Not that you don't value that, it's just that the space doesn't fit anymore.
Gigi: Well, it also counts on a type of scale.
Brett: Oh, yeah.
Gigi: And having a space that's empty most of the time is awkward, and we've had a lot of orchestras and symphonies that have been playing with this for a while. In Los Angeles, LA Phil has been in Union Station and playing in all sorts of external spaces. So there's a lot of venues who have been going out into the community and being much more malleable using the outdoors. But you do have the funding that came into these big multiplexes rethinking, do we need all these theaters? Do we need these fixed seats? Can we think of multi-time spaces for a lot of these places to be creative spaces for lots of different activities?
Brett: I have two different arts organizations that I've been talking to—one in DC, one in Chicago—both of them have agreed that—well, I say it in different ways, but essentially saying—the digital place is a place. It's one more way to leave their building. And that it's a global space, but it's also a different way to serve the local space. And it's an interesting way to both be able to go to Union Station and have your main space that funders still like to fund and then have a space that is flexible and digital. Or perhaps, like Seattle Symphony, they have a flexible bricks and mortar space that is trying to break that mold. But I think there are a lot of opportunities, as you said, breaking the assumptions or I love the term "break the algorithm," because if we think about our habits as society as our own forms of algorithm, then we have a lot of different algorithms that we need to interrogate.
Gigi: And then the systems along with the spaces. Los Angeles County spent some time a few years ago, and money, putting together a whole bookable space matrix for the city. And that is a struggle to put together and maintain, that sort of discovery of usage. There's for-profit models like Peerspace, etcetera, that let you look for one-time space usage, but permitting doesn't match that and policy and parking. And so we've got systems also around all of these that a great arts manager might say, "Where might there be an opportunity there in figuring out sort of the data science under it?" I'm really big looking at the data science of the recovery is crap, that where we're coming back to, and I'm trying to put together an open source mapping system so that we can be mapping the return, and no one was mapping the before. This is something that we were presenting at South By a year ago when South By got cancelled, was 71 city studies looking at cities—not intentionally pre-pandemic—pre-pandemic, but then there's not kind of a mapping of the recovery, at least I'm seeking mapping of the recovery. You know, what are we coming back into?
B: So, in 2019, Maremel Institute launched the Center for Creative Futures to explore how tech impacts creative careers and work. And, given how the pandemic has dramatically shifted how people are using technology in their careers, the establishment of this particular center seems pretty timely, and I'm really curious about it. Can you speak about the center's work, especially in the last year?
Gigi: The center in part also did the first incarnation of Amplify Music. So, Maremel's been a wonderful grab bag of fabulous projects for at least 15 years now. And a lot of the pilots over the past five years have been looking at the future of creative work, looking at how we think about or don't think about or model or structure or support, fluid work, nonlinear work, portfolio, jobs, all the different boundary list careers. The fact that, especially in creative industries, that is a vast amount of work and there's almost no support structures. So we've been doing pilots, not under the center's framing, for at least five years with partners. So, launching programs, some online, some live, to help try to put some framing under the semi-traditional, I'm going to intern, I'm going to apprentice, I'm going to in many ways pay some university for college tuition as well as work for free, which has all sorts of equity issues to it. But looking at the fact that if we're progressively in this fluid work system, that the support structures for people underneath are broken at best. And so you may find your way into a mentorship, into an apprenticeship, but it really tends to be a who you know and also how broad thinking you are. Do you apply for something on LinkedIn or Indeed and then don't understand then you don't get it? And more and more the whole what-color-is-your-parachute 40-year-old model of go to informational interviewing seems to be gone and replaced by people thinking they can do a Google search, go to Indeed, go to LinkedIn, and magically have their next job in the creative arts. So, that's not happening. So we were working with partners trying to help people think about, where am I building myself? These are nonlinear creative journeys to build creative futures. So in that we launched Creative Innovators as a podcast to collect stories of people who have gone the nonlinear road and about how they make decisions. So that's one of the things that launched within the platform. And, initially, Amplify Music, where we were finding all of these folks who were struggling with trying to deal with the journey that their own organizations were going through during the pandemic and trying to get them to talk to each other. So both of those launched under the Center for Creative Futures, and Amplify ended up moving into Rethink Next, a nonprofit that was formed in 2018, which is a better structure for this growing entity that was really gathering community conversations. So, the Center for Creative futures is really looking at sort of three avenues of projects and proposals that are out in the world. One of them is, what are better creative career support structures in communities? And, whether it's under higher ed, under 40-year-olds retrenching their work, and I'm probably in two conversations a day on all these new business models people are trying to do and how to support changing work patterns and habits and what's going on there. Some of them are how I think about the creative futures and creative work and how AI and machine learning are already embedded in so many of our creative tools and how we're running businesses that we've not caught up with that at all. So, in some cases, working with HR execs and people who are building training systems; that's still in some sort of nascent stages because what you will do as a creative person in a company has changed massively over the past, let's even say graciously, 10 years, let alone a year, let alone five years. So a lot of the things that the pandemic has surged forward five years and getting people more deeply embedded digitally, a lot of those are going to affect what you do for work.
And then the third area is really around this sort of community aspect, the local communities. And there's some great framing around super communities that's coming out of some folks in the UK. We have all these emergent structures that have come out of both the pandemic, as well as were already happening in different communities that almost no one's measuring or mapping. They're still looking at the more formal organizational structures. So what is it that's happening? And so I've mentioned already some of the emergent physical structures that have come out in communities. What's the ecosystems between all of these? If I'm going to be having a creative ecosystem in Los Angeles, what are all the parts of it? And we tend to think it's all companies, or nonprofits, or individual artists, but there are so many new methods of organizing that we're coming into and they're not being written about by the press, and they're somewhat being researched in academia. So we're kind of looking at the, I guess, micro/mezzo/macro levels of how we talk about the future. And a lot of it is the fact that we tend to think of more technological determinism with futures and not the fact that we are all building our futures together. And a lot of it is future narratives, and that also goes into the algorithm work.
So Maremel and the work under it tends to be a combination of pilots, programs with partners, and, in some cases, building educational systems and platforms with folks, as well as a lot of research that's happening. Rethink Next is tending to be the entity that we're doing a lot of community-based work. And Amplify Music has now grown into 45 organizations; funded research around community stories around the world of what's happening in terms of transformative change this year; a new podcast, Amplify Music Conversations; and, potentially, knock on wood, lots of conversations about long-term grant funding and project funding to take a look at how we tell the stories of what is happening locally, globally. And it's not something that is a featurette on what this great entrepreneur has done in one company. It's all of the space in between. I love the concept of Ma, the space in between the beats in Taiko drumming. This is really the story of Ma. What is all the spaces in between and the tension between the spaces? How do you measure that? How do you discuss it? How do you policy it? How do you fund it? How do you look for kindred spirits? And so this is really looking at the connective tissue. You know, social network analysis in one means, but also, how do we inspire and let people get inspired that they can take an idea from one community and take it into the next?
B: I love that. And then sharing that knowledge as widely as possible.
Gigi: And helping partners seed things, too. So, there's lots of cool people in the world doing great stuff. And half my time is spent: "Have you met Joe?" [Laughter] "He's doing what you're doing in another city." And I find that all the time now that, you know, again, the algorithm is somewhat the toxic companion to this because people assume that magically a search will find them, you know, their kindred spirits in the world. And the connective tissue is what's both magical right now and a little bit constrained. Because a lot of great stuff is a little bit hidden in the digital mist.
Brett: Our search tools are advertising platforms, so it's impossible to find what you're actually looking for. A friend of mine, his son is a musician, and his son is very passionate about this concept of snail mail. And snail mail is not the same as putting it in the post office. Snail mail is trying to foster relationships and accidental meetings. Like, if I wanted to send you a letter, I might start with giving it to B, and then B might hand it off to somebody else who's driving to Ohio, and who knows how long it will take to get there. But finding those opportunities for accidental meetups is so hard, and it's great that you're able to sort of speed up those accidental connections. The magic happens in the in-between, so how can you foster those connections that let that friction occur?
Gigi: And thinking differently. So, I tend to talk about postcard moments, that I went to film school because my TA back in the day sent me a postcard. And the postcard had my grade on it because we didn't get those by email. But at the bottom was, "You should think about applying to film school. You did really well in this class." And that note was then why I applied to USC film school. So, for a lot of things in people, it's not the, "I will search in the perfect magical answer will come up," it's how does that great plan happenchance happen that may happen now that will resurface 10 years later in your life. And it's almost a different means of thinking that is open doors for new opportunities, new connections, building new companies, creating whole new arts opportunities, but we tend to be in a mindset that the algorithm will provide. And the fact that I can simply look at this and suddenly the right answer comes up. I spend probably two weeks a term teaching my students: here's how Google works, here's how search works, here's how keywords work, here's the economics of data. Because they think that everything magically will, of course, be there and not realize that every piece of data has funding and cognitive design bias to it as to why it was even constructed and that there's whole industries around data and data in the arts. And they're always baffled by the fact that the data doesn't just magically exist they need at their fingertips to make life decisions.
Brett: And, like you, I'm a big believer in what I would call synchronicity—I use the term synchronicity—of that postcard, is that there are moments that an algorithm is actually the opposite of, which are these moments of synchronicity.
Gigi: And I come to the postcard moment because my TA had to send the postcard, right? So, do you send enough postcards out for people to see the opportunity, instead of just a haphazard connection? I connect this for my students a lot. I make sure that I'm sending out postcards and that I'm connecting opportunities and suggestions out for people instead of just hoping that you walk through the dust and something comes in.
Brett: So, this has been fantastic. Is there anything that you would like to plug, say about the world that you haven't said yet, talk about any work that you're doing that you really want to share out to offer that opportunity for synchronicity?
Gigi: I'm looking to build micro courses on some of this stuff so that people have a place to go and find and discover and building out additional platforms that are connected platforms between lots of different folks. Lots of things in negotiation and discussion right now, but if someone listens to this and wants to come play, holler. I'm probably launching 10 projects a year and we see what sticks and moves forward, and some of them are proprietary with partners and some of them are out in the world, so glad to talk with anybody about any of these passion projects. I'm moving locations from Southern California to the Washington state area. But also I tend to do this work out in the global world, so if you are any place and listening to this, don't feel that it has to be constrained to looking at things in the United States, etcetera. I'm partnered up with all sorts of folks all over the world on these projects.
B: And how can people find you on the internet?
Gigi: The best place is to probably ping me with a logical question on LinkedIn. I'm @GigiJohnson on Twitter, I'm @DrGigiJohnson on Instagram, and I'm Gigi Johnson on LinkedIn. You can go to amplifymusic.org and find all sorts of phenomenal crazy stuff we've been doing around the world with connecting people around music and music change. Maramel.com is a space. Rethinknext.org is constantly fundraising for projects, and I'm glad to talk to you there, as well. I'm on Clubhouse, you can come find me on Clubhouse. I'm glad to connect almost anywhere but spending a lot of time IRL.
Lutie: Thanks for listening to the AMT Lab podcast. Don't forget to subscribe and to leave a comment. If you would like to learn more, go to amt-lab.org. That is A-M-T dash L-A-B .org. Or, you can email us at amtlabcmu@gmail.com. You can also follow us on Twitter or Instagram at Tech in the Arts, or on Facebook and LinkedIn at Arts Management and Technology Lab. You can find the resources that we referenced today in the show notes. Thanks for listening. See you next time.
[Musical outro, fades in]