Museum Audience Insight

One Man's Crusade: Stephen Colbert's quest to save the Generation Y male from himself

The Generation Y male, in his late teens or twenties, is a fascinating mixture of technical prowess and media savvyness.  He is also, well, having circles run around him by the Generation Y female.

Now before we go any further, yes, there are Generation Y males who are incredibly smart, well-educated, who read, go to museums, give back to their community, and who are creative geniuses.  They do exist (and if you are a Generation Y male reading this, we bet you are one of them). 

BUT we are talking in generalizations here, and, in general, this generation of young men has seen their female peers succeed, and intellectually grow, at dizzying rates.

Consider:

• Today, women in their 20s are nearly 50% more likely to have a college degree than men in their 20s.
• In most major metropolitan areas, the gender gap has reversed, and women in their 20s outearn men in their 20s . . . the gap's grown to as much as $1.20 for every $1.00 a young man earns (and we bet this has increased as the recession has disproportionately hit young men who work in finance and real estate/construction).
• Additionally, in our research women in their 20s are nearly twice as likely to read and/or visit museums in their leisure time.  They are also three times more likely to participate in art activities, twice as likely to be what we call "Creative Consumers," and are nearly 50% more likely to give money to causes they care about (in contrast, men are 2.5 times more likely than women to say they "don't change my life for causes"). 

Enter Stephen Colbert, the star of The Colbert Report.  We have blogged about him before, and we bet this will not be the last time we focus in on this media juggernaut.  The Colbert Report is an incredibly popular show, particularly with young men.  And Stephen Colbert is engaging them, and making them care, about things that, well, we want people to care about.  Such as:
    

• Museums.  In his efforts to have his portrait considered a "National Treasure" and part of the Smithsonian's collections, he doubled visitation at the National Portrait Gallery during the period his portrait was on display.  Undoubtedly a huge number of those visitors were young men.  (By the way . . . his efforts ended up being successful as his portrait is now part of the permanent collection of the National Museum of American History.)
• Science.  When NASA announced a competition to name the newest wing of the space station, Stephen Colbert encouraged viewers to write in "Colbert" as their entry. "Colbert" garnered four times more votes than any other entry.  OK, so NASA declined to actually name the space station wing after Colbert . . . . but they did name the treadmill installed in the space station the "Colbert." 
• Politics.  He talks about politics all the time on the show.  It is news satire.  But he also took action . . . by attempting to get on the Presidential ballot for the South Carolina primaries.  He didn't get on the ballot, but not by lack of signatures.  And viewers learned more about the election process along the way.
• Iraq.  He cares passionately about the soldiers in Iraq (though his real position on the war itself is unclear).  He doesn't want us to forget that young men and women are making big sacrifices there.  To help increase morale, he spent a week in Iraq this June, filming his show (and he got a crew cut to match his camouflage suit).  Soldiers loved it.  And it was yet another way of keeping Iraq front and center in our lives.
• Philanthropy.  Through his show he has encouraged viewers to donate to worthy causes.  In 2008 his viewers donated over $250,000 to donorschoose.org.  Just last month he announced the support of Colbert Nation for US Speedskating, which had just lost their biggest sponsor.  He encouraged viewers to financially support our speedskating team . . . and they donated over $40,000 in just the first 24 hours.  And you know he will keep encouraging them to do so.  (Additionally, we bet you that viewers, regardless of whether they donated or not, will be much more engaged in the speedskating events during the Winter Olympics.  They'll care because Stephen Colbert made them care through his support and coverage.)

So why does this matter to museums?  Stephen Colbert is reaching out to what is probably the toughest, most jaded audience segment out there, young men.  He is forcing them to care, and they are responding.  And isn't that something that museums strive to do? 

Why do you think Stephen Colbert succeeds at reaching young men?  His humor?  His ability to poke fun at himself?    And what do you think museums can learn from The Colbert Report?  Simply click on “comments” below to share your thoughts (and if you are reading this from your e-mail subscription, go to our blog to comment).

The Magic of Seven-Year-Olds

Note - this article is identical to the one just sent out via our e-newsletter, which we archive via our blog.  For those who subscribe to both the blog and the e-news, we apologize for the duplication!

Over the past couple of years we have talked quite a bit about Museum Advocates - those curious individuals who love going to museums in their leisure time - but where do Museum Advocates come from?  And do they have childhood experiences that are similar?

To find out, we started digging into the patterns and backgrounds of more than 30,000 core visitors to museums to see what separated Museum Advocates from core visitors.  As we started wondering about some of the clues buried in the data, last summer, we asked 110 Museum Advocates in their 20s and 30s to tell us about their earliest childhood museum memories, and then coded those memories to look for patterns.  Additionally, this spring we gathered 501 early museum memories of museum professionals (one from a study of science museum employees, the other from a survey of New England Museum Association members).  While museum professionals are different than the general public, what we found generally reinforced the findings from our Museum Advocates outside the museum field. 

Before we dig into what we found, a quick caveat:  this is just the tip of the iceberg.  Thus far we have examined some early museum memories, and their patterns, among Museum Advocates, but there is far more research to do, such as comparing these memories with those of Core Visitors (those who visit museums often, but tend not to define themselves as curious or to be particularly engaged with museums) and other segments of the general public.  We will be doing much more research to continue to test our hypothesis and the results we have found thus far (and any feedback you have on our findings will be helpful!).
 
Common Themes

 

For all 611 respondents, the mean, median, and mode of earliest museum memories is age seven.  Seven (give or take a year) appears to be a particularly "sticky" time when memories are being made and retained, and museums have the power to create those memories.

 
For about 2/3 of respondents, memories include one or both parents.  Although some individuals specifically mentioned their mom or dad, generally respondents referred to parents or family, implying both parents.  Given that our research indicates that only about a third of moms visit museums with their spouses, this also implies that dad may be rather important to raising new generations of Museum Advocates.  We'll test this theory out in future research, when we will ask more specifically about the roles of both moms and dads. 

For about ¼ of respondents, however, earliest memories were of school field trips, with no mention of any parent.  We were heartened to see this as we were initially afraid we would see a pattern that Museum Advocacy was almost exclusively handed down from parent to child.  Instead, there is a clear path for youngsters to become engaged with museums regardless of the engagement of their parents . . . through school field trips.  School field trips appear to be incredibly important not only to learning and visitation in the short-term, but also for the long-term sustainability of museums and to create a strong pipeline of museum professionals.  So we are increasingly troubled not only by the cuts in field trips by school districts, but also in the number of museums that are discontinuing field trip programming.

What They See Is Important

And when it comes to those early memories, what they see may actually be more important than what they do.  About a third of early memories came from natural history museums alone, a disproportionate number, indicating that natural history museums may have a disproportionate impact on the creation of young Museum Advocates.  Additionally, art museums and history-based showed up at high rates.  Why these types of museums?  Memories tended to be of large-scale, static exhibits that promote internal activity and imagination.  Dioramas, dollhouses, suits of armor, dinosaurs, period rooms.  Objects and exhibits that tend to be highly narrative appeared time and time again.  One of our favorite memories clearly illustrates how a static object can spark internal cognitive activity:  "[I was] maybe 4 years old and running around under the huge whale . . . . I pretended I was swimming with him - and we were friends."

Other museum types do not appear in as many memories.  At first we thought age might be the issue, in that older Museum Advocates were young children before large numbers of children's museums and science centers, in particular, were around.  But when we control for age and only look at respondents in their 20s and 30s, still these types of museums do not show up at nearly the rate of other types.  The only exception?  Overall, current employees (of all ages) of science centers were more likely to remember visits to science centers. 

The low incidence of children's museums is relatively easy to explain.  Many families stop going to children's museums when they feel their oldest child has started to grow out of it, typically around age five or six . . . and before that magic age of seven.  So a smaller incidence makes sense.  The low incidence of science centers is a puzzle, however, though a few more details may shed some light on this, and give us paths of inquiry for future research.

First, the memories from these types of museums are less detailed from natural history, history, and art museums.  Memories tend to be less vivid, more concise.  A typical one might be "went to the science center with my class."  Quite a difference.  At this time, we are postulating that the different narrative quality of the exhibits may be key to this difference, though we will certainly test this theory, among others.

The second thing we noticed is that, overall, hands-on experiences were in very short supply in the collected memories, even, again, when we controlled for age and only looked at younger adults.  Overall, fewer than five percent of memories included a hands-on activity.  And, of course, children's museums and science centers are highly hands-on.

Does this mean hands-on activities are not as important as traditional, static, artifact-based exhibits?  Not at all.  Hands-on activities have been shown to be a tremendously valuable learning format.  Just, for whatever reason, they are not as memorable.  We would suggest that museums continue to offer both types of experiences as they provide different, but equally important, learning opportunities.  Besides, parents of young children view hands-on activities as absolutely essential for a visit.  No question.  They expect them. 

 
These results are, as mentioned earlier, only preliminary, and just scratch the surface of what we think is a very rich vein of future research.  We would love to hear your thoughts as we create the research plan for delving deeper.  (And if you want to share your early museum memories, we would love to hear them too!).  To share your thoughts and questions, click on “comments” below (and if you are reading this from your e-mail subscription, go to our blog  to comment.

Facebook is My Newspaper

I remember the day when I realized that Facebook had replaced the newspaper for young adults. 

 
It was the day that I checked my account and saw a piece of national news (courtesy of Scott) and some museum-industry news (Jennifer).  There also was some hometown news (Jeff), and my sister posted she was eating lunch at her desk (a turkey sandwich).
 
Additionally, it was the second time that week alone that I first heard a piece of major news via news stories posted by friends.  Not via television, a news website, or the paper.  Facebook.
 
And it hit me.  I didn't need the Boston Globe anymore.  Or the White County News.  My friends were editing all the news I needed.  No, not editing.  Curating. 
 
We all know the newspaper industry is hemorrhaging.  Nearly every week another major paper stops printing (though does not necessarily mean stop operating, as some are going online-only). 

Even my Boston Globe has a murky future, at best, as it is losing $1,000,000 each week.  Hardly a sustainable future.  And while I still get the paper version of that newspaper, I recently cancelled my Wall Street Journal hard copy in favor of a subscription via my Kindle.  I am finding the reading experience to be different, but equal to, the hard copy (and it is never missing, or wet, or late).
 
Technology has made this all possible, and it has turned the news industry, in particular, upside-down.  Newspapers are struggling to find ways to pay the bills when consumers expect their news to be free and online. 
 
Meanwhile, the media world is continuing to fragment, and websites like Facebook are the places where information is pulled back together.  I can pull in Twitter feeds and RSS (real simple syndication) feeds in to only one or two spots, creating my own, custom, news pages.  I could stop getting the Boston Globe and not really feel I am missing much, if anything.  Having always been a newspaper junkie, that realization is a bit shocking for me, yet I am hardly alone.  A recent study from the Pew Research Center indicates only a third of American adults would miss their daily newspaper "a lot." 
 
Overall, the decline of the newspaper industry has brought some crucial trends and shifts to our attention - trends and shifts that will affect museums as well. 
 
1 - It totally changes the PR landscape.  Museums have traditionally used newspapers and, to a lesser degree, magazines, to promote their exhibits and programs.  Now that model is rapidly disappearing as the economics of those industries fail (and as linear inches allocated for news content continues to decrease).  Other avenues must be used to spread the word about events, programs, and exhibits. 
 
2 - It is increasingly an inefficient use of promotional dollars.  Newspaper advertising is not inexpensive.  On a "per dollar" basis, other venues, ranging from your own e-newsletter to social networking sites to even direct mail can provide more bang for your buck.
 
3 - The decline of newspapers is part of a broader trend from which no one is escaping as people seek out information in different ways.  News is now primarily consumed online and via television (or even radio - NPR's audience has grown by nearly 50% since 2000).  What other venues are out there providing similar information to what you share?  Wikipedia?  Flickr?  YouTube?  Fortunately, museums have a secret weapon:  the real, authentic stuff.  Working with those information venues could actually create more relevance and interest in your museum.
 
4 - There has been a fundamental shift in our economy to a free-based model.  So many things are now free, running off a model of giving away certain content, or services for free, and it is paid for by a smaller number of consumers who receive additional, premium content or services.  But here is the thing.  Museums can and should thrive in the free economy because it is already the business model museums operate on.  Many people (visitors) receive free or drastically reduced admission that is subsidized by a much smaller group of members, donors, and funders.
 
5 - Newspapers were considered by many as a stalwart of the community.  Yet now, according to the Pew report, fewer than half of adult Americans think civic life would be hurt "a lot" if the local paper failed. (Go to http://pewresearch.org/pubs/1147/newspapers-struggle-public-not-concerned for more on Pew's research.) What are the other stalwarts of a community?  Museums certainly fall in the community stalwart category, but how many would miss us "a lot" if we failed?  It is a worthy question to ask yourself.
 
Yet all of this also presents tremendous opportunities for museums.  Going back to Facebook as just one example, it allows me to receive notices of things going on in my community, including museum programs, just like a local paper might.  I can "fan" all the museums I want, and am automatically informed of all their programming.  And see if any of my friends are going (thus making my own visit more likely).  It also reminds me of an event the day beforehand, so I don't forget.  I can subscribe to the news feeds, blogs, and Twitter feeds of museums as well, and actually become more informed directly from the museum itself on what is going on than reading an (edited) version via the paper.  And the best thing?  Museums actually have better control of the message and the distribution is free.
 
Will Facebook replace the newspaper for everyone?  No, but the fastest growing demographic on Facebook is adults over 35.  Facebook may or may not have legs, but if Facebook fails, something new, and probably even more comprehensive, will undoubtedly take its place.  The trick is keeping up and utilizing these tools to reach your audiences (and potential audiences) more effectively, where they already look for information, and in a way that builds relevance in their lives.

What do you think?  Is there anything you disagree with?  Or do you see these trends playing out as well in your community?  Click on “comments” below to share.  (If you are reading this from your e-mail subscription to the blog, please go to our blog's website to add a comment.)  Please include the name of your museum as well!

-Susie

Older Men are Awesome

They are curious, philanthropic, and engaged.  They are really happy visitors to a variety of museums.  They are a dream audience.

Who are they?  Men over sixty.  They are awesome. 

We first noticed the engagement of older men in our outdoor history museum (OHM) survey, as they responded to the survey in greater numbers than women over sixty, an atypical survey finding.  And when we analyzed their responses, it was clear:  of all demographic segments, men over sixty were the happiest with the museum.

Then we saw something similar in our study of science museum visitors.  While older men responded to the survey in similar numbers to older women, they were again the happiest audience segment.  Turns out, they are a fascinating audience.

Older Men and Museum Visitation

So why do older men visit, and enjoy, museums? 

Primarily, they go because they are curious and want to learn. Yet older men also chose a variety of reasons for visiting, telling us that while this audience is the most curious (and engaged, as we will see), they have a lot of different reasons for visiting museums.  Additionally, older men are generally more positive than other audience segments, and we consistently find that they are the most likely to say that their needs are met.

But it was their rate of membership that gave us a strong clue that something special was going on with these older men.  We consistently find in our research that older men are the most likely to be members.   Their reasons for joining are striking as well because they are so overwhelmingly philanthropic, focusing on improving the museum or helping their community.  Additionally, they are the least likely to join for budgetary reasons, such as saving money or to pay for services received.  It turns out that, for many, the budget is not a big issue.  The older men in these studies are very affluent, with incomes well above the national average, and they have extremely high educations to match.

Interpretation Preferences

So what do older men enjoy at museums?  When we carefully examined the written-in comments of our older men, it was clear:  it is all about their personal interests.  Men wanted to see and do blacksmithing, perform experiments, build stuff, or do anything with railroads.  Or, as one gentleman told us, he wanted to "fire the cannon, climb the rigging, sing the songs."  They want to do the stuff.  They want to delve in deep and work with their hands - in a way they want the antithesis of their pre-retirement lives when many of them were professionals working behind desks. 

Self-curated experiences are also key for older men.  That is, they do not want a lot of facilitation from staff.  They are happiest when they are given a map of the site or a floorplan of the museum . . . and then let loose. 

But while they generally avoid guided tours, if you have the keys to the storage area, or the attic or the cellar, men will go along with you to see that.  As one man in his sixties noted, "I enjoy behind the scenes opportunities.   To see attics or basements that are not usually available . . . " 

Underlying all of this is a burning desire to learn, because "I just enjoy learning new things," as one older man noted. 

Older Men - Great Engagement, Great Opportunity

So what does it all boil down to?  Older men are highly engaged, curious, philanthropic visitors and supporters of museums.

When serving older men, keep in mind that they are focused on adult activities and their own personal growth.  They want those behind-the-scenes opportunities, and they want the facts.  They are confident visitors who know how to navigate museums, and who often already have an excellent level of knowledge about history, science, and art, but they still want you to include a layer of new information that they will find stimulating. 

The audience of older men is relatively small, but with their interest, lifestyle, and affluence, they represent an under-tapped opportunity.  How?  They are in a time of their life when they are pursuing their personal interests intensely.  Museums can do a great deal more to attract greater audiences of older men by creating, as one older man requested, "higher level learning experiences" catering to their interests.  This extends to volunteer and development opportunities as well. 

The big question, going forward, is how Baby Boomer men will approach retirement.  To date, they have reinvented each lifestage anew, and there is no reason to think that their approach to retirement will be like that of their parents.  Will they follow these patterns, or will they chart a new course . . . which may not involve museums as much?  Will they also want to work with their hands?  Or will they want to provide other types of volunteer services?  In the meantime, we will be keeping an eye on the activities of the first wave of Boomer retirees, and how their behaviors will affect museums and volunteering.

Overall, however, older men are a fantastic audience.  They are happy with museums, and they find museums stimulating.  They exhibit deeper levels of engagement than other audiences primarily because their primary motivations for visiting are personal.  They are, in short, a dream audience. 

We would love to hear your thoughts.  Simply click on “comments” below.  (If you are reading this from your e-mail subscription to the blog, please go to our blog's website to add a comment.)

The Challenge of Moms

Moms are a tough audience.  They come to museums in large numbers, and with certain expectations.

Yet when we analyze the data from our major studies of museum visitors, we find that while moms in their thirties and forties are, overall, the largest audience segment visiting museums, we also find that they are the least satisfied segment as well.

Most likely to visit.  Least satisfied.  Let's step back and consider this.

Museum-visitor moms in their thirties and forties are primarily parents of pre-school to middle-school age children.  They are very well educated, when compared to the general population, and thus tended to postpone child-rearing.  They are also relatively affluent when compared to the general population. 

But despite their relative affluence, these moms tend to be highly budget-minded.  They tend to be more likely to join to pay for services they (and their families) have received, or to save money, than they are to contribute for more philanthropic reasons, such as to improve the museum. 

In our studies, moms are also the least satisfied audience segment, as illustrated by the graph below:

Yet they visit museums a lot, visiting their local museums multiple times a year.  Why?  Primary reasons given are family time, for learning opportunities for their children, and because their children like to visit. 
 
What is missing here? 
 
Mom's interests.

Overwhelmingly, when we look at the responses of moms in all of our studies, it has become clear that the primary drivers for museum visitation are the education, entertainment, and engagement of her children.  In the written-in comments from moms, moms rarely use words like "I" or "me," but instead use "we" and "my family."  Mom's interests, and engagement, tend not to be on the agenda. 
 
Moms are coming in large numbers, yet they are the most dissatisfied audience of all.  What gives?

When we began to analyze the responses of moms in our recent science museums and Connecticut surveys it became clear that there were two types of moms responding.  One group of moms who believe that visiting museums is an important thing to do for their children.  The other group are moms who believe that too, but these moms are also curious, omnivorous cultural consumers who love going to museums.  And when we compared the responses from these two different groups of moms, we found huge differences in their attitudes and their visitation patterns at museums.

The curious moms overwhelmingly fall into the category we call "Museum Advocates."  They love museums and value what they have to offer to them, their children, and their communities.  These moms tend to be more likely to support the museum for philanthropic reasons than the other moms, are much more positive about the museum, and are 50% more likely to say that their needs are met.  Finally, these moms visit a much wider variety of museums with their children, from science museums to art museums to history-based museums, etc.

The moms who visit primarily for their children overwhelmingly fall into the category we call "Core Visitors."  These moms tend to choose from a smaller variety of museums that moms perceive to be more age-appropriate for their children, namely museums that are highly hands-on, such as science centers and children's museums.  These moms tend to cycle in and cycle out of museums based on that perceived age appropriateness, and some types of museums are visited rarely, if at all. 

Because the focus of these moms is so much on the needs of their children, it seems as if Core Visitor moms make themselves second class visitors at museums.  It is not something that museums do to moms, but something they do to themselves.  And since Core Visitor moms are less likely to be engaged with the museum themselves, the fear is that their lack of engagement, and interest, subconsciously rubs off on their children, who then stop asking to come to the museum, breaking the museum-going habit.  And that is something we cannot afford. 

Instead, museums have a tough nut to crack:  engaging moms by layering on content for her in a way that clearly does not detract from the engagement of her children.

This is a topic that we are obsessing about at Reach Advisors.  When we analyze the two different types of moms, there are no significant demographic differences.  They have similar education levels, education levels, etc.  Yet their engagement levels, and their attitudes and visitation patterns, are very different. 

Of the handful of differences that we noticed, there is one we will flag in this email (with more to come in future discussions and research).  While almost all moms tell us that hands-on activities are primary attractions for their visits, the curious, engaged moms are much more likely to also mention narrative and story-telling, saying things like "telling with a good story is key."  That is a path of inquiry we are anxious to explore further as we continue our research to discover more about the differences in these two groups of moms, and the implications for developing more Museum Advocates.

As we plan additional research on moms, and Museum Advocates, we would love to hear from you what questions this data raises.  What do you want to know more about?  Is there anything you disagree with?  To share your thoughts and questions click on "comments," below. 

Data from Connecticut comes from the Reach Advisors study of Connecticut Cultural Consumers,

funded by the Connecticut Humanities Council and Connecticut Landmarks.