Re: Rhizome Needs Your Support

On Wednesday, November 12, 2003, at 04:00 PM, Ivan Pope wrote:

> Subject: RHIZOME\_RAW: Rhizome Needs Your Support
>
>
>> Hi Rhizomers:
>> I'm
>> writing to you now to let you know that we need your support once
>> again.
>> Our goal this year is to raise $37,000 by the 1st of February. So far
>> we
>> have raised about $5,000.
>>
>> It will cost about
>> $210,000 to operate Rhizome.org this fiscal year (this is about
>> two-thirds of what our was budget last year).
>
> Hi Rachel,
> I think we've been here before. I'm a donor and have the T-shirt to
> prove
> it. But honestly I got the impression that Rhizome was over now, apart
> from
> the mailing list which we stay on for old times sake.

Hi Ivan: I am sorry you feel that Rhizome is over. But not everyone
does. Yesterday I had three telephone calls from members who called to
make contributions in person. Two of them noted that given where they
live, one in Southern Europe and another from Western U.S., Rhizome was
a meaningful resource for information and opportunities and a
significant part of their life as new media artists. Also, last month's
web traffic was about 4.5 million hits with 1.5 million pages
requested. So, it's not over for a lot of people who find the contents
and services important.


> I haven't seen any
> announcements about the ArtBase for months, is it suspended or did I
> miss
> something?
>
The ArtBase was on summer holiday: this was a way to streamline
operations. The submissions page would have been revitalized by now but
Francis and Feisal (who just started working with us last week, with a
focus on the ArtBase) have been at an archiving conference.

> Your mail asks for $37,000 ('this year') by Feb 1. But you give no
> context
> to this. What is 'this year' (as February is patently in next year)?
> You say
> you have raised $5000 'so far', but what is 'so far'? When did this
> fundraising start? What part of your fundraising is this $37,000. Is
> this an
> emergency, or do you have to raise this every quarter? How does this
> relate
> to the $210,000 it will cost 'to operate Rhizome this fiscal year'?
> I say we've been here before because I can remember discussions before
> about
> Rhizome's income v. expenditure and I think Tribe pointed us to the
> Rhizome
> accounts. I did go to the website to read something about Rhizome's
> expenditure/income, but I can't find anything. So I thought I'd ask.
>
I meant that since July, the start of our fiscal year, we have raised
$5K from member contributions and our goal is to raise $37K before
February 1. A larger portion of our funding is expected to come from
institutions and government agencies. Thus far this fiscal year we have
received about $10K from foundations and $8K from a government agency
(and we are eagerly awaiting a check for $70K from a foundation any
week now).

July is technically when fundraising started for this year. Unless
something drastic happens in the funding climate in the U.S. we will
expect to get support from those who use our services each year. So
it's not an emergency in that something new has happened to the
organization, but it is an emergency in that if we don't raise the
money, I am not sure we'll be able to continue operations through the
year. As you probably remember from last year, instituting membership
fees was a very difficult decision. But we just don't see an
alternative given how little money there is for organizations of our
size and age in the United States. The alternative is for Rhizome to
cease to exist.

I will definitely post our latest audit once it is done. It's being
completed now by a certified accountant. Feel free to remind me about
this.


>> Your support will be put to good use. In the next few months, we will
>> initiate a new cycle of commissions in which we will award more than
>> $12,000 to Rhizome artists, revamp our search engine, develop a new
>> ArtBase curatorial program and launch Rhizome Memberships for
>> Organizations, a new program that will provide access to Rhizome.org
>> through schools, libraries and arts organizations from Chiang Mai to
>> Chile. And we will continue to offer our core programs, including the
>> Rhizome.org web site and email lists, with a focus on further
>> improving
>> the quality and relevance of our content.
>
> Give away $12,000 <— hmm, if it were $120,000 it might pique
> interest, should I support this?
> Reveamp the ArtBase. <— yes please, cluster around the ArtBase, I
> support this assuming the ArtBase is still open
> Recruit organisations. <— Fundraising, should I support this?
> Provide access to Rhizome.org through schools, libraries and arts
> organisations <— are you giving them web access then? what more do
> they
> need?
>
In this program, those visiting from schools, libraries and art centers
that subscribe to Rhizome (at a discounted rate) would be given access
to the site's contents. If these folks just had web access but were not
Rhizome members, they wouldn't be able to read or view Rhizome
contents. This program opens the site up to them, and by the way, will
focus on including poor and excluded countries as well as institutions
in Europe and the U.S.


> I thought by way of comparison with Rhizome's $210,000 expenditure, we
> could ask Ruth and Marc how much it costs them to run Furtherfield.
> Then we
> could do a value comparison.
>

That would be interesting. In some ways, it would be a comparison of
apples and oranges since British art projects are way more subsidized
than American ones, and since I imagine Furtherfield doesn't have the
traffic, international audience or membership numbers Rhizome does.
It's also hard to compare a project that has been active since 1996 to
a younger one in terms of programs and archival contents. By the way,
my remarks are in the spirit of inclusion and openness. I am not about
Rhizome v. Furtherfield – in fact I welcome Furtherfield's arrival
into the world. – Rachel





>