‘Art lovers of the world unite to aid Florence’: techniques to motivate the crowd in post-disaster heritage crowdfunding

Abstract

Crowdfunding relies heavily on public participation and public participation is subject to certain conditions, such as the motivation to participate and the effectiveness of the call to participate. Using the case of the 1966 Florence Flood, this article explores the techniques to motivate the crowd adopted by the Committee to Rescue Italian Art, a committee formed in the USA to help protect the heritage of Florence, and newspaper reports published in the USA between 1966 and 1968. Seven overlapping frames were evident in the news reports and the CRIA’s call: damage, fundraising, people, rescue, restoration, the committee and its actions, and the value of Florence. In essence, the techniques adopted to motivate people to participate in the post-disaster crowdfunding included: (1) the dependency on mainstream media; (2) frequent use of all available communication channels; (3) multiple types of calls for support; (4) emphasis on the value of Florence; (5) highlighting a shared sense of ownership; (6) giving a sense of urgency; and (7) evoking the memory of past disasters. While the news media worked to inform the public, CRIA worked to encourage them to participate. The media reports analysed did not leverage emotive content to attract crowd participation whereas the calls initiated by CRIA used some emotive content. The article concludes with a discussion on the implications for managing crowdfunding campaigns to utilise the power of decentralised collective action.

Résumé

«‘Les amateurs d'art du monde entier s'unissent pour aider Florence’ méthodes pour inciter la population au financement participatif du patrimoine après sinistre»

Le financement participatif repose fortement sur la participation du public or la participation du public est soumise à certaines conditions telles que la motivation à participer et l'efficacité des appels à la participation. En étudiant les réponses aux inondations de Florence en 1966, cet article explore les méthodes employées pour motiver la population, adoptées par le Comité pour sauver l'art italien (CRIA), un comité formé aux États-Unis pour aider à protéger le patrimoine de Florence, et celles rencontrées dans les articles de journaux publiés aux États-Unis entre 1966 et 1968. Sept pôles imbriqués étaient évidents dans les reportages et les appels de la CRIA: les dégâts, la collecte de fonds, les personnes, le sauvetage, la restauration, le comité et ses actions ainsi que la valeur de Florence. Essentiellement, les méthodes adoptées pour motiver les gens à participer au crowdfunding après sinistre comprenaient: (1) l'utilisation des médias grand public; (2) l'utilisation fréquente de toutes les voies de communication disponibles; (3) différents types d'appels à l'aide; (4) l'accent mis sur la valeur de Florence; (5) l'accent sur un sentiment d'appartenance commune; (6) un sentiment d'urgence; et (7) l'évocation du souvenir des catastrophes passées. Tandis que les médias s'efforçaient d'informer le public, le CRIA s'efforçait de l'encourager à participer. Les reportages médiatiques analysés n'ont pas exploité le contenu émotionnel pour attirer la participation du public alors que les appels lancés par CRIA contenaient un certain contenu émotionnel. L'article se termine par une discussion sur les implications de la gestion des campagnes de crowdfunding pour utiliser la puissance de l'action collective décentralisée.

Zusammenfassung

„‘Kunstliebhaber der Welt vereinigt euch um Florenz zu retten’: Methoden zur Motivation der Öffentlichkeit beim Crowdfunding für Kulturerbe nach einer Katastrophe“

Crowdfunding ist in hohem Maße von der Beteiligung der Öffentlichkeit abhängig, und die Beteiligung der Öffentlichkeit unterliegt bestimmten Bedingungen wie der Motivation zur Beteiligung und der Wirksamkeit der Aufrufe zur Beteiligung. Bei der Untersuchung der Reaktionen auf die Flutkatastrophe in Florenz im Jahr 1966 untersucht dieser Artikel sowohl die Methoden, die das Committee to Rescue Italian Art (CRIA), ein in den USA gegründetes Komitee zum Schutz des florentinischen Kulturerbes, zur Motivation der Öffentlichkeit einsetzte, als auch jene, die in den zwischen 1966 und 1968 in den USA veröffentlichten Zeitungsberichten zu finden waren. In den Zeitungsberichten und den Aufrufen des CRIA waren sieben sich überschneidende Themenbereiche zu erkennen: Schäden, Finanzierung, Menschen, Rettung, Restaurierung, das Komitee und seine Maßnahmen sowie der Wert von Florenz. Im Wesentlichen wurden folgende Techniken angewandt, um die Menschen zur Teilnahme am Crowdfunding nach der Katastrophe zu motivieren: (1) die Nutzung der Mainstream-Medien; (2) die häufige Nutzung aller verfügbaren Kommunikationskanäle; (3) verschiedene Arten von Aufrufen zur Unterstützung; (4) die Hervorhebung des Wertes von Florenz; (5) die Betonung des Gefühls der gemeinsamen Verantwortung; (6) das Hervorheben der Dringlichkeit; und (7) das Erinnern an vergangene Katastrophen. Während die Medien die Öffentlichkeit informierten, bemühte sich CRIA darum, die Öffentlichkeit zu motivieren. Die analysierten Medienberichte setzten keine emotionalen Inhalte ein, um die Menschen zur Teilnahme zu bewegen, während die von CRIA initiierten Aufrufe durchaus emotionale Inhalte enthielten. Der Artikel schließt mit einer Diskussion der Auswirkungen auf das Management von Crowdfundingkampagnen beim Einsetzen der Kraft dezentralisierter kollektiver Aktionen.

Resumen

“‘Los amantes del arte de todo el mundo se unen para ayudar a Florencia’: Técnicas para motivar a la gente en crowdfunding para el patrimonio cultural tras catástrofes”

El crowdfunding se basa en gran medida en la participación pública, y ésta está sujeta a ciertas condiciones, como la motivación para participar y la eficacia de las convocatorias. Examinando las respuestas a la inundación de Florencia de 1966, este artículo explora las técnicas que fueron utilizadas para motivar a la gente para ayudar a proteger el patrimonio de Florencia; las adoptadas por el Comité para el Rescate del Arte Italiano (CRIA), un comité formado en EE.UU, y aquellas encontradas en los informes periodísticos publicados en EE.UU. entre 1966 y 1968. En los reportajes de prensa y en las convocatorias del CRIA aparecían siete marcos superpuestos: daños, recaudación de fondos, personas, rescate, restauración, el comité y sus acciones, y el valor de Florencia. En esencia, las técnicas adoptadas para motivar a la gente a participar en el crowdfunding posterior a la catástrofe incluían: (1) el uso de los principales medios de comunicación; (2) el uso frecuente de todos los canales de comunicación disponibles; (3) múltiples tipos de peticiones de apoyo; (4) el énfasis en el valor de Florence; (5) el énfasis en un sentimiento compartido de propiedad; (6) un sentimiento de urgencia; y (7) la evocación del recuerdo de catástrofes pasadas. Mientras que los medios de comunicación trabajaban para informar al público, el CRIA lo hacía para alentarle a participar. Los reportajes periodísticos analizados no impulsaban el contenido emotivo para atraer la participación de la multitud, mientras que las convocatorias iniciadas por la CRIA sí contenían cierto contenido emotivo. El artículo concluye con un debate sobre las implicaciones de la gestión de campañas de crowdfunding para aprovechar el poder de la acción colectiva descentralizada.

摘要

“‘全世界艺术爱好者联合起来援助佛罗伦萨‘：在灾后遗产众筹中激励群众的技巧”

众筹在很大程度上依赖于公众参与，而公众参与又受制于某些条件，如参与的动机和号召参与的有效性。本文研究了 1966 年佛罗伦萨洪灾的应对措施，探讨了“抢救意大利艺术”（ CRIA ）（一个成立于美国，用于保护佛罗伦萨遗产的委员会）所采用的激励群众的技巧，以及在 1966 年至 1968 年期间美国出版的报纸中的发现。根据新闻报道和 CRIA 的呼吁，存在七个重叠的框架：损失、筹款、人民、救援、恢复、委员会及其行动、佛罗伦萨的价值。从本质上讲，激励人们参与灾后众筹所采用的技巧包括：(1)利用主流媒体；(2)频繁使用所有可用的沟通渠道；(3)多种类型的支援呼吁；(4)强调佛罗伦萨的价值；(5)强调共有者意识；(6)紧迫感；和(7)唤起人们对过去灾难的记忆。新闻媒体致力于向公众提供信息，而 CRIA 则致力于鼓励公众参与。作者分析媒体报道没有利用情感内容来吸引公众参与，而CRIA发起的呼吁则包含一些情感内容。文章最后探讨了管理众筹活动，以利用分散的集体行动力量的意义。

Keywords:

• crowdfunding motivation
• 1966 Florence Flood
• disasters
• cultural heritage
• heritage crowdfunding
• disaster response

Notes

1 Historically, the city has suffered during the Second World War and also a mafia bombing in 1993.

2 Gaia Pianigiani, ‘50 Years After a Devastating Flood, Fears That Florence Remains Vulnerable’, The New York Times, November 2016, https://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/08/world/europe/50-years-after-a-devastating-flood-fears-that-florence-remains-vulnerable.html#:~:text=%E2%80%9CThe%20Arno%20reached%20this%20height,warn%20that%20Florence%20remains%20vulnerable (accessed 17 February 2021).

3 Giorgio Batini, 4 Novembre, 1966: l'Arno in Museo a Firenze: Gallerie, Monumenti, Chiese, Biblioteche, Archivi e Capolavori Danneggiati dall'alluvione (Firenze: Bonechi, 1967).

4 United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization, ‘Florence, Venice: UNESCO Opens World Campaign’, The UNESCO Courier, January 1967, https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000078222 (accessed 22 May 2019).

5 In a draft letter by Comitato Fondo Internazionale per Firenze to all countries of culture, the committee highlighted ‘The flood in Florence, the 4th of November 1966, has caused more damage to her artistic, cultural and historic heritage than that by the war’. This draft letter is stored in Box 1 of the collection Alluvione di Firenze 1966—Comitato Fondo Internazionale per Firenze in Fondazione Centro Studi Sull’Arte Licia e Carlo Ludovico Ragghianti, Lucca, Italy.

6 Bruno Molajoli, ‘Years to Repair the Damage’, The UNESCO Courier, January 1967, https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000078222 (accessed 22 May 2019).

7 Correspondence items between the members of different committees suggest that the committees worked collaboratively. These are stored in the Fondazione Centro Studi Sull’Arte Licia e Carlo Ludovico Ragghianti, Lucca, Italy and villa i Tatti in Florence. See also, Helen Spande, ed., Conservation Legacies of the Florence Flood of 1966: Proceedings of the Symposium Commemorating the 40th Anniversary (London: Archetype Publications, 2009). Many conservators recollect their memories of working with professionals from other countries. For example, Kirsten Aschengreen Piacenti recalls how the UK committee worked with the other committees to help set up conservation laboratories.

8 Spande, Conservation Legacies of the Florence Flood of 1966.

9 Committee to Rescue Italian Art, ‘The Story’, https://cria.itatti.harvard.edu/ (accessed 15 August 2021).

10 Fred Litch, ‘Building a Network of Support for Conservation: The Committee to Rescue Italian Art’, in Spande, Conservation Legacies of the Florence Flood of 1966, 154.

11 This quote is inspired by the headlines of various news reports of the time including Henry Gaggiottini, ‘Help of Art Lovers Asked by Florence’, Chicago Tribune, 11 November 1966; ‘Art Lovers Around World Rail Florence’s Support’, Santa Cruz Sentinel, 25 November 1966; ‘Art Lovers of World Go to Florence’s Aid’, Chicago Tribune, 26 November 1966; ‘Italian Floods Art Lovers Uniting to Save Treasures’, Prince George Citizen, 30 November 1966. The quote has also been used in the title of the paper.

12 Pakhee Kumar, ‘Crowdsourcing to Rescue Cultural Heritage during Disasters: A Case Study of the 1966 Florence Flood’, International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction 43 (2020): 101371.

13 Kumar, ‘Crowdsourcing to Rescue Cultural Heritage during Disasters’.

14 The telegram was sent on 17 November 1966 by Sydney J. Freedberg, Vice Chairman, National Executive Committee of CRIA to Villa i Tatti in Florence and stated: ‘urgently need daily Florentine newspaper coverage of art damage to help our salvation committee’. This telegram can be viewed at: https://cria.itatti.harvard.edu/exhibits/show/the-committee/call-to-action.

15 Kristy Graham and Dirk H.R. Spennemann, ‘Heritage Managers and their Attitudes towards Disaster Management for Cultural Heritage Resources in New South Wales, Australia’, International Journal of Emergency Management 3, no. 2–3 (2006): 215. See also Aparna Tandon, ‘Post-Disaster Damage Assessment of Cultural Heritage: Are we Prepared’, in ICOM-CC 18th Triennial Conference Preprints, Copenhagen, Denmark, ed. J. Bridgland (Paris: International Council of Museums, 2017), 4–7.

16 David Alexander, ‘The Florence Floods—What the Papers Said’, Environmental Management 4 (1980): 27.

17 For instance, in a letter sent to CFIF, Johnson wrote: ‘I would like this money to help towards the poor people of Florence. I love the arts but people need it more’. The letter is available in Box 7 of the collection Alluvione di Firenze 1966—Comitato Fondo Internazionale per Firenze in Fondazione Centro Studi Sull’Arte Licia e Carlo Ludovico Ragghianti, Lucca, Italy.

18 Pakhee Kumar, ‘Twitter, Disasters and Cultural Heritage: A Case Study of the 2015 Nepal Earthquake’, Journal of Contingencies and Crisis Management 28, no. 4 (2020): 453.

19 Committee to Rescue Italian Art, ‘The Story’.

20 Spande, Conservation Legacies of the Florence Flood of 1966. In the section Oral History of the Florence Flood: Personal Recollections, Nicolette Bingham, assistant to the head of CRIA, recalls that the committee had received contributions from many countries including Micronesia, Belgium and Chile.

21 June Taboroff, ‘Cultural Heritage and Natural Disasters: Incentives for Risk Management and Mitigation’, Managing Disaster Risk in Emerging Economies 2 (2000): 71.

22 Pakhee Kumar, ‘Learning from the Past and Preparing for the Future: Cases and Tools for Cultural Heritage During Disasters’ (PhD dissertation, IMT School for Advanced Studies Lucca, 2019).

23 Jeff Howe, ‘The Rise of Crowdsourcing’, Wired Magazine 14, no. 6 (2006): 176.

24 Enrique Estellés-Arolas and Fernando González-Ladrón-de-Guevara, ‘Towards an Integrated Crowdsourcing Definition’, Journal of Information Science 38, no. 2 (2012): 189.

25 Henriette Roued-Cunliffe, ‘Collection Building amongst Heritage Amateurs’, Collection Building 36, no. 3 (2017): 108.

26 Sally Ellis, ‘A History of Collaboration, a Future in Crowdsourcing: Positive Impacts of Cooperation on British Librarianship’, Libri 64, no. 1 (2014): 1–10.

27 Since the term crowdsourcing was coined recently many definitions acknowledge the internet as its necessary medium. However, some researchers believe crowdsourcing to be a form of outsourcing. See, for example, Estellés-Arolas and González-Ladrón-de-Guevara, ‘Towards an Integrated Crowdsourcing Definition’. As this research argues that crowdsourcing pre-dates the internet age, the author uses her earlier definition from Kumar, ‘Crowdsourcing to Rescue Cultural Heritage during Disasters’. The definition was created using the eight components of crowdsourcing defined by Estellés-Arolas and González-Ladrón-de-Guevara, and include goal, process, task, medium, the call to participate, motivation, crowdsourcer and crowd. The author used several case studies from the literature on cultural heritage crowdsourcing to map the relationships between the eight components to create this definition. In this, the author found three components to be particularly important to be included in the definition: large groups of people (crowd), tasks and collective goal.

28 Vincent Rouzé, ‘Crowdsourcing and Crowdfunding: The Origins of a New System?’, in Cultural Crowdfunding: Platform Capitalism, Labour and Globalization, ed. Vincent Rouzé (London: University of Westminster Press, 2019), 15–33.

29 Aki Kallio and Lasse Vuola, ‘History of Crowdfunding in the Context of Ever-Changing Modern Financial Markets’, in Advances in Crowdfunding: Research and Practice, ed. Rotem Shneor, Liang Zhao, and Bjørn-Tore Flåten (Cham: Springer International Publishing, 2020), 209.

30 Alexander Simons, Lena Franziska Kaiser, and Jan vom Brocke, ‘Enterprise Crowdfunding: Foundations, Applications, and Research Findings’, Business & Information Systems Engineering 61 (2019): 113.

31 Kumar, ‘Crowdsourcing to Rescue Cultural Heritage during Disasters’.

32 Those interested in further exploring this can refer to: Frances Clarke, ‘The Italian Art and Archives Rescue Fund’, in Spane, Conservation Legacies of the Florence Flood of 1966, 152. See also, Kumar, ‘Crowdsourcing to Rescue Cultural Heritage during Disasters’; UNESCO, ‘Florence, Venice’.

33 Yongick Jeong and Sun Young Lee, ‘What Determines International Disaster Coverage in the US News Media?’, Journalism 20, no. 12 (2019): 1593.

34 Alexander, ‘The Florence Floods’.

35 Christopher Clarkson, ‘Training in Book Conservation after the Food’, in Spande, Conservation Legacies of the Florence Flood of 1966, 71.

36 Spande, Conservation Legacies of the Florence Flood of 1966. Lucilla Kingsbury, who was a student at the Courtauld Institute in London, recalls working with media being disruptive as conservators had to pause their works.

37 Michael D. Barnes et al., ‘Analysis of Media Agenda Setting during and after Hurricane Katrina: Implications for Emergency Preparedness, Disaster Response, and Disaster Policy’, American Journal of Public Health 98, no. 4 (2008): 604.

38 Rohit Jigyasu and Vanicka Arora, Disaster Risk Management of Cultural Heritage in Urban Areas: A Training Guide (Kyoto: Research Center for Disaster Mitigation of Urban Cultural Heritage, Ritsumeikan University, 2012).

39 Luke Winslow, ‘Frame Analysis’, in The SAGE Encyclopedia of Communication Research Methods, ed. Mike Allen (Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, 2018), 584.

40 Kathleen S. Valde, ‘Grounded Theory’, in Allen, The SAGE Encyclopedia of Communication Research Methods.

41 Mary L. McHugh, ‘Phi Correlation Coefficient’, in The SAGE Encyclopedia of Educational Research, Measurement, and Evaluation, ed. Bruce B. Frey (Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, 2018), 2.

42 Nick Mikos, ‘A New Italian Renaissance—In Tourism’, New York Times, 26 February 1967.

43 Kate Starbird, ‘Crowdwork, Crisis and Convergence: How the Connected Crowd Organizes Information During Mass Disruption Events’ (PhD dissertation, University of Colorado at Boulder, 2012).

44 Pew Research Center, ‘Newspapers Fact Sheet’, 29 June 2021, https://www.pewresearch.org/journalism/fact-sheet/newspapers/ (accessed 16 August 2023).

45 Tim Causer and Melissa Terras, ‘Many Hands Make Light Work. Many Hands Together Make Merry Work: Transcribe Bentham and Crowdsourcing Manuscript Collections’, in Crowdsourcing our Cultural Heritage, ed. Mia Ridge (Farnham: Routledge, 2016), 57.

46 Previous research on crowdsourcing during the 1966 Floods shows that media coverage generated interest in the community. See Kumar, 'Crowdsourcing to Rescue Cultural Heritage during Disasters'. This is evident not only in disaster crowdsourcing and crowdfunding but also for events and festivals. See, for example, Ros Derrett, Festivals & Regional Destinations: How Festivals Demonstrate a Sense of Community & Place, Rural Society, 13, no.1 (2003): 35.

47 Alexander, ‘The Florence Floods’.

48 Ano Lobb, Nancy Mock, and Paul L. Hutchinson, ‘Traditional and Social Media Coverage and Charitable Giving Following the 2010 Earthquake in Haiti’, Prehospital and Disaster Medicine 27, no. 4 (2012): 319.

49 Samuel Mochona Gabore and Deng Xiujun, ‘Do National and International Media Cover the Same Event Differently? The Online Media Framing of Irreecha Festival Tragedy’, Communicatio 44, no. 1 (2018): 55.

50 Anthony Downs, ‘Up and Down with Ecology: The Issue–Attention Cycle’, in Agenda Setting: Readings on Media, Public Opinion, and Policymaking, 1st edn, ed. David Protess and Maxwell E. McCombs (New York: Routledge, 1991), 64.

51 Hsiang Iris Chyi and Maxwell E. McCombs, ‘Media Salience and the Process of Framing: Coverage of the Columbine School Shootings’, Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly 81, no. 1 (2004): 22.

52 Abhishek Behl and Pankaj Dutta, ‘Engaging Donors on Crowdfunding Platform in Disaster Relief Operations (DRO) using Gamification: A Civic Voluntary Model (CVM) Approach’, International Journal of Information Management 54 (2020): 102140.

53 Jake Hobbs, Georgiana Grigore, and Mike Molesworth, ‘Success in the Management of Crowdfunding Projects in the Creative Industries’, Internet Research 26, no. 1 (2016): 146.

54 Minjung Sung and Jang-Sun Hwang, ‘Who Drives a Crisis? The Diffusion of an Issue through Social Networks’, Computers in Human Behavior 36 (2014): 246–57.

55 Roger Bennett and Rita Kottasz, ‘Emergency Fund-Raising for Disaster Relief’, Disaster Prevention and Management: An International Journal 9, no. 5 (2000): 352.

56 Mervi Pantti, ‘Disaster News and Public Emotions’, in The Routledge Handbook of Emotions and Mass Media, ed. Katrin Döveling, Christian von Scheve, and Elly A. Konijn (New York: Routledge, 2010), 235.

57 Goran Calic and Elaine Mosakowski, ‘Kicking off Social Entrepreneurship: How a Sustainability Orientation Influences Crowdfunding Success’, Journal of Management Studies 53, no. 5 (2016): 738.

58 Brian Graham, Greg Ashworth, and John Tunbridge, A Geography of Heritage: Power, Culture and Economy (New York: Routledge, 2016).

59 Daniela Angelina Jelinčić and Marta Šveb, ‘Financial Sustainability of Cultural Heritage: A Review of Crowdfunding in Europe’, Journal of Risk and Financial Management 14, no. 3 (2021): 101.

60 Mousumi Roy, Sustainable Development Strategies: Engineering, Culture and Economics (Oxford: Butterworth-Heinemann, 2020).

61 See Senator Edward M. Kennedy’s remarks at a symposium in Spande, Conservation Legacies of the Florence Flood of 1966.

62 Spande, Conservation Legacies of the Florence Flood of 1966. Lucilla Kingsbury mentioned working with media was considered very important as publicity was necessary.

63 Pakhee Kumar, ‘Social Media, Disasters, and Cultural Heritage: An Analysis of Twitter Images of the 2015 Nepal Earthquake’, Visual Communication Quarterly 29 (2022): 34–46.

64 Carlos Castillo, Big Crisis Data: Social Media in Disasters and Time-Critical Situations (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2016).

65 Kumar, ‘Crowdsourcing to Rescue Cultural Heritage during Disasters’.

66 Paul Conway and Martha O'Hara Conway, eds, Flood in Florence, 1966: A Fifty-Year Retrospective (Michigan: Michigan Publishing, 2018). See also, Silvia Messeri and Sandro Pintus, 4 novembre 1966: l'alluvione a Firenze (Firenze: Ibiskos Editrice Risolo, 2006).

67 Jelinčić and Šveb, ‘Financial sustainability of cultural heritage: A review of crowdfunding in Europe'.

68 Behl and Dutta, ‘Engaging Donors on Crowdfunding Platform in Disaster Relief Operations (DRO)’.

69 Jaakko Suominen Anna Sivula and Maria B Garda, ‘Incorporating Curator, Collector and Player Credibilities’ Special Issue. Journal of Media Studies and Popular Culture 174 (2018): 96.

Additional information

Notes on contributors

Pakhee Kumar

Dr Pakhee Kumar (she/her) is a Lecturer (Teaching) in Sustainable Heritage and Data Analysis at the Institute of Sustainable Heritage, University College London. She is an architect and heritage management professional with broad research interests in crowdsourcing, social media, disaster management in cultural heritage and digital heritage. She is the Deputy Programme Director of MSc Sustainable Heritage on which she teaches modules about heritage data management, management of heritage buildings and collections, and crowdsourcing. She also leads the annual field trip of MSc Sustainable Heritage.