Sunday, 5 of February of 2012

Copyright

One of the four main types of intellectual property rights (or “IPR”) is “copyright”. This is quite a well known term in artist and design circles but surprisingly is very often a misused term.

Copyright gives creators of original works (called “copyright works”), such as artwork, illustrations, pieces of writing and even software code, legal rights allowing the creator to stop reproduction of that work by others without the creator’s permission. Copyright does not need to be registered with any Government agency to exist, it exists automatically when an original copyright work is created and the first owner is automatically the creator of that work. The duration of copyright for most types of creative work is 70 years after the death of the original creator.

If copyright exists in a copyright work it is illegal for anyone to make copies of that copyright work without the creator’s permission. It is also illegal for anyone to issuing copies of that copyright work to the public or reproduce it on the Internet (or to broadcast that copyright work if it is music or film) without the permission of the creator, i.e. the original artist or designer.

One issue that is sometimes overlooked is where an artist or a designer is working for someone else when they create copyright works. This will affect ownership. If an artist or designer is employed by a company or other person, then when that artist or designer as an employee creates a new creative work, the copyright in that creative work is automatically owned by the artist or designer’s employer. However, the opposite is the case if the artist or designer is self-employed and working for clients on a freelance basis. In the latter situation, the artist or designer would automatically be the owner of the creative works he or she creates even where the client has instructed them to do it and paid the artist or designer to do the work. Because of this, it is a good idea for all artists/ designers to have a simple agreement for work they do for clients which covers the issue of IPR. This will normally be a Freelancer Agreement.

Whoever is the owner of copyright in creative works, they will be able to give permission to others to use their work commercially (this is called an IPR licence) in return for regular payments (licence fees or royalties) or if a company or person wants to buy copyright in certain creative works outright from the owner for a one off lump sum this can be done by way of an IPR assignment. Both are common in the art and design world. If copyright works are assigned, this will not change the duration of the copyright which will still last until the end of the seventieth year after the death of the original creator, regardless that the original creator no longer owns the copyright because it has been assigned to someone else.

It is worth remembering that copyright does not protect ideas, or such things asnames or subject titles. So, for example, a painting of a still life with a clever theme will not stop other artists staging still life on the same theme and producing paintings of them. The same goes for ideas for creative works; for example, if you write down a summary of an idea for a piece of creative work that you are planning to produce, copyright in that written work will only allow you to stop someone copying the written words, and will not allow you to stop them from producing the envisioned work summarised in writing.

Image by Slaven Gabric, Don’t walk !

  • Share/Bookmark

How to Manage your Creative Work and Intellectual Property Online

An brilliant article by Yanko Design, who discovered the unceremonious theft and unlicensed reproduction of a unique and clever little product, The Pocket Light, which had previously received rave reviews across design blogdom in 2008.

This post was originally created by Yanko Design, who recently reported on the nasty theft of a design; The Pocket Light by Hyun Jin Yoon & Eun Hak Lee (Ryan Harc),

The Pocket Light was stolen, produced and sold unlicensed under another brand. The original light-design had garnered much attention from the online community in 2008.
ORIGINAL POCKET LIGHT

intellectual_light

COPY OF THE POCKET LIGHT

intellectual_light2

In many ways the Internet is a new medium when it comes to the management of intellectual property. Many designers are still struggling to reconcile its power of reach versus control of information flow. Here are some thoughts on managing creative content on the Internet.

1) Managing Expectations

Whenever a design is shown to the public there is a chance it could get ripped off. Design awards, graduation shows, public critiques, discussions with model makers, even obtaining costing for prototypes are all possible avenues where a design could get stolen.

The Internet is no different. In fact, because of the power of the Internet’s reach, the chance could be higher. However I do find it interesting that designers take more precautions showing work at graduation shows or manufacturers than on the Internet.

This being said, I have to say that the case of the copied Pocket Light happens rarely, especially if the stolen design was just a concept. The reason because the additional work required in taking a concept to an actual product requires far more effort than just coming up with an idea. In many cases it is very difficult to do if the designer that came up with the idea is not part of the development team.

That’s why people often tend to rip off finished products like LV bags or Vertu phones. All the hard work has already been done, all you need to do is just reverse engineer it. Oh, and there is that brand element as well.

So how or why did the Pocket Light get stolen? My guess is that it was “The Perfect Storm”. So happens that a manufacturer or a brand had access to all the right ingredients and be in a position to take up that idea and convert it quickly and easily into a product. In my opinion it was just sheer bad luck on the part of Ryan Harc.

2) So then why would anyone want to post his or her designs on the Internet?

There are actually a number of reasons, but the trick here is making sure you figure out “why?” before you do so.

The first and most common reason is credibility. Budding designers or design studios looking to make a name for themselves often share online self initiated design projects with the aim of getting their talent discovered.

If this were your objective, then getting a design copied would then fall in the realm of “imitation is the best form of flattery.” It is unfortunate, but consider milking it for all its worth.

The next reason designers publish designs online is that they are looking for a job. Most of the time these designs are portfolio work that have already been introduced in the market. However there are designers that would include personal design projects or submissions to design competitions hoping to show potential employers the breath of their talent.

The final last two reasons are closely link. That is, designers intending to sell a product or the rights to a design for production. If this is indeed your objective, you should ensure that you have taken the relevant intellectual property protection like patents or design registrations.

An important thing to note is that these 4 points are mutually exclusive. You cannot hope to “gain credibility” and also aim to “sell your design”. Both require different mindsets, and to combine the two is a recipe for disappointment.

3) So what can we do to protect ourselves?

I’m no expert on intellectual property, but by understand the gist of what it can do for you widens your options. Do research the details of Utility Patents, Design Registrations and Trademarks at your nearest Intellectual Property Office as soon as you can.

But for the purpose of this discussion, let us look at IP more from a strategic angle; is IP really needed for what you want to do?

An old employer of mine has this policy on patents. If an idea or invention could be licensed to another party for royalties, then it is worth taking the effort to get a patent. Why is this so? It makes perfect sense when you look at patents from a business point of view.

In certain cases the cost for a patent could come in at USD $30,000-50,000(for a worldwide coverage) or more. This does not include things like patent searches, legal fees and other incidentals. So if you look at it from an ROI (Return on Investment) perspective it just doesn’t not make sense. More so when you consider that most patents are applied on inventions before they are even launched or market proven.

I’m not saying don’t patent your idea. If you think you have a killer idea or invention, then you should really consider investing in a patent. The hard part is figuring out if the idea is really worth it.

Now this comes to the next part of the patent equation. Lets say you managed to pull together $30,000 and got yourself a patent. You now have peace of mind. You launch your product and it becomes a small success. The success is small enough that you don’t rest on your laurels but big enough for the rest of the world to take notice that it is now market proven. Soon cheap imitations start to flood the market while you are struggling to grow your business. The question now is do you have the financial muscle or just simply the willpower to enforce your patent?

Many inventors I have spoken to shared with me that patents are really just for a peace of mind. In certain cases they are useful, in other times, too much of a good thing. At the end of the day the decision is really yours but be aware of what it can do for you, and weigh the pros and cons of that hefty investment.

4) So what shall we do now?

Let me now share with you 4 suggestions on what I think designers can do, considering the landscape I have outlined above.

a) Share it, Get famous and Move on.
Most designers would fall under this category. So when you share designs, you do it to share and celebrate the cleverness of the idea. You may also do it for karma, and in the hope that by sharing, karma comes back to you as fame and maybe even fortune. But at the end of the day you are realistic, you expect nothing in return and quickly move on to the next big idea you come up with.

b) Make it, Share it, Sell it, and Get Out!
One thing about patents they never talk about is that it can be circumvented. There is no guarantee that someone will not takes your idea, modify it and sell it as a better alternative. So one way to play it is that if you think you have a good idea and want to capitalize on it; then a way to do it is to make your money and get out.

ipoor T-Shirt - Design Sojourn

I planned my iPoor T-Shirt project with this strategy in mind. I knew the idea had merit, but with the product being a T-Shirt with a simple silkscreen graphic, I knew anyone could easily copy it. So I hatched a plan to make the iPoor T-Shirt in limited quantities and once it sold out, I’m out of the game. This strategy also forces you to ensure costs, margins and return on investment all work they way you want it.

c) Share it to Stake your Claim to the World.
I’m sure you can relate to my situation. I’m an employed designer, struggling to make ends meet, but I have ideas and some savings to invest in it. So how can I leverage on the power of the Internet to help me? I know I can’t afford a patent, so what do I do? I share it and stake my claim to the world, and if the design gets ripped off people will hopefully “do the right thing”.

Spaces for Ideas Sketchbook : Design Sojourn

My Spaces for Ideas Sketchbook is one such project, where by engaging my readers for feedback and getting them to be part of the development process, I hope to build a following of people that have a strong relationship with the product. Furthermore, by showing my process and prototype, there is no doubt as who came up with the idea first and when.

As a side note, the final design has not been revealed as it is in the process of getting a Design Registration. This is an alternative to a patent and not as expensive. Did I mention Google Design Registrations?

d) Go under the Radar
My last suggestion does depend on the nature of your product, design or invention. Akin to much of the things you will find on Etsy, going “under the radar” means you build a design so niche, unusual to make, or not inline to existing standard processes that it becomes difficult to copy.

Read the full original article here:

http://www.yankodesign.com/2010/01/22/how-to-manage-your-creative-work-and-intellectual-property-online/

Written by Brian Ling – a multidisciplinary industrial design leader that goes under the pseudonym of “The Design Translator”. He muses about the art of design leadership and the business of strategic industrial design over at his website Design Sojourn. He often laments the lack of good soy mochas and Italian pizzas (with Rocket and shredded Parma ham) in Asia.

  • Share/Bookmark

Hidden cost of studying in the Arts

Student Union Arts London are fighting to uncover an evil that we know is true everywhere - the horrific hidden costs of studying an Arts course!

SUARTS are campaigning to ensure that any additional course costs (on top of tuition fees) are upfront, transparent and reasonable.

This means additional course costs should be stated on all Entry Profiles, there should be no compulsory fees further to those stated, there should be support and structured programmes in place to help students with their fundraising and sponsorship and student should receive a breakdown of what their additional fees have been spent on.
Currently additional course costs are administered on an ad hoc basis that varies widely across different colleges and courses – some students are asked to pay £100 towards materials at the beginning of each term. After this, the extra costs students are asked to pay could be almost anything. Often sprung upon students with little or no notice and at difficult times of the year. This affects every student, but we all know that those from lower income backgrounds and those hard up of cash are going to suffer the most.

It is not unknown for students to enter the last few weeks of Uni not knowing whether they will be able to afford the obscene amounts of money that are needed for a Final Show.

We accept that costs for materials must come from somewhere, but if students are going to be asked to pay for something which they need for their course, the University needs be upfront, transparent and reasonable. Something which currently does not happen.
Over the course of the next term SUARTs be collecting raw data on the extent of the hidden course costs that you have to face. We will be distributing blank Compulsory Costs guides (through Course Reps) so you can all feed in to this. This will be analysed to highlight the breadth and disparity of the problem. This will then be taken to the University to ensure these are addressed and to highlight the absurdity and unfairness of the situation.

What can you do?
• Report any ‘surprise’ costs that you are asked to cover this year by emailing campaigns@su.arts.ac.uk
• Fill in your blank Compulsory Costs Pro Forma when it is distributed this term
• Stand as a Course Rep!

Last week their travelling campaign ‘Hidden Costs’ went on a whistlestop tour of all the University of the Arts London colleges.

They gathered pics of students looking surprised by these outrageous extra costs -looks like they had fun!Ssee the facebook group (tinyurl.com/UALhiddencosts), tag yourself to be in with a chance of winning some great prizes! Prizes include…
DAB Digital Radio
£50 cash
£20 HMV vouchers
and other mystery prizes!

Winners will be announced 22nd January

http://www.suarts.org/content/213845

  • Share/Bookmark

Looking towards 2020

Check out Arts Council England's ideas for a ten-year 'politician proof' funding plan.

In an effort to define how they will work with artists and arts organisations to create positive change for the arts over the next 10 years, Arts Council provide the following information and ask for your ideas and opinions.

Where are we now?

How we sit within a diverse and ever-changing England, taking into account the progression of society, industry, technology and the environment.

Our vision

Our ambitions for the next 10 years, encompassing diversity, internationalism, strengthened organisations and heightened excellence across the arts.

Realising our vision

How we will adapt and change with society and the arts to achieve our ambitions.

Literature review

Our 2009 review of recent literature relating to the arts in England, developed to inform our 10-year strategic framework.

To give them your feedback you’ll need to register with Arts Council.

Do it.

http://www.artscouncil.org.uk/consultation/

  • Share/Bookmark

Joining Instructions & Agenda for Feb Meeting in Lincoln

The agenda and joining instructions for the meeting in Lincoln are ready and can now be downloaded by clicking here

Please register if you have not already done so using this form

  • Share/Bookmark

Emerging Workers Report Launch

The Arts Group is calling for legislation governing the practice of work experience, internships and placements. In its “Emerging Workers” document the Arts Group puts forward the case that Government action is needed in order to protect students and graduates in the arts and creative industries.

Many arts organisations and businesses are reliant upon unpaid workers, both on work experience and on longer term placements. Whilst the Arts Group recognises that some of these organisations are run on low budgets, it is not in the interest of diversity, equality or creativity for internships to remain as the preserve of the well off.

Kit Friend, Chair of the Arts Group commented “Access to the creative professions should be based on ability, not means. As the labour market is near saturated with those financially able to take up unpaid placements, equal access to the creative professions will not be realised unless internships are regulated by government.”

The Arts Group recognises that the creative sector is made up of a large number of small and medium enterprises, and calls for funding and bursaries to be made available to employers so that they are able to continue to offer internships that are genuine training and development opportunities.

>> A pdf of the report can be downloaded by clicking here

  • Share/Bookmark

Arts Council Cuts: A rough guide

As part of the proposed 2010 budget, a new plan was announced in December 2009 to merge the UK Film Council and the BFI. How detrimental are these plans to our arts and culture? And can a decrease in government funding really be prevented? In order to answer these questions I have set up a rough guide for those who, like me, were vague on the subject.

Though there have been no major cuts to Arts Council funding just yet, the looming elections are likely to set a new tone.  Much has happened over the past two years to dramatically alter its budget.  In 2007, the Arts Council placed a large chunk of its funding towards the 2012 Olympics. Last year’s recession meant that public sectors faced major setbacks, and the profits made in the arts were significantly reduced.

This all sounds very gloomy, but is it really? The 2009 budget report in April announced it would cut £4 million out of the previous £467 million, decreasing the budget by less than 1%. The Department of Culture, Media and Sport, which, along with the Arts Lottery, funds the Arts Council has had its own cuts in 2010 of £20million. The Arts Council, therefore will only be bearing a fifth of DCMS’ losses.

Although these cuts are minimal, they do come as a great disappointment. Since 2002, the Arts Council has had yearly increase in funding. That year, a new spending plan was announced that would make the DCMS budget £257 million higher in 2005-06 than in 2002-03. Furthermore in 2007, the Arts Council was promised £20 million over the following three years.

As for prospective cuts, the Arts Council continues to point out that the revenue from the Arts sector is much higher than its spending. In July last year, MP Andy Burnham told the Stage: “the small – relatively small – amount of funding here, produces a huge benefit not [just] socially, educationally, culturally, but also economically.” Indeed, when Liverpool became Europe’s Capital of Culture in 2008, it generated £176 million from tourism alone and an £800 million boost to regional economy.

No doubt 2010 will see a decrease in Arts Council money. Can a new government change this? Or is it dictated by the recession? Predicting the former, Chief of the Arts Council Alan Davey met with the Conservative Party last October to discuss the importance of funding. Like Burnham, he argued that arts revenue was beneficial to the economy. On the opposite side of the spectrum were the conclusions reached at the Funding Transition conference hosted by arts think tank Missions Models Money in December.  Chair of the meeting Clara Miller, CEO of Non-profits Finance Fund, argued that it is the way arts businesses are run that needs to change, rather than government revenue. Can art businesses, as Clara Miller suggests, overcome financial struggle by remodelling?  These are questions organisations, as well as art students and artists, will have to face as we draw closer to a new government and a revision of this year’s budgets.

Words by Lemma Shehadi

  • Share/Bookmark

Tory Arts Funding policy encourage “leaner, though not meaner” Golden Age for the Arts

The Guardian has coverage of announcements from Shadow culture secretary Jerermy Hunt indicating what a Conservative victory at the general election could mean for the shape of the Arts. We've requested a meeting with Jeremy to discuss our members issues after failing to get a response from Ed Vaizey MP, and in light of their opposite numbers within the Lib Dems being very receptive - watch this space!

The Guardian has coverage of announcements from Shadow culture secretary Jerermy Hunt indicating what a Conservative victory at the general election could mean for the shape of the Arts. Contrary to claims (last year at the launch of the National Campaign for the Arts Manifesto launch) by Ed Vaizey, Shadow Minister for Culture, it appears our sector may also be subject to cuts in funding in response to dwindling public finances.

The coverage is led by the Tory aspiration to enter into a “Golden Age” for the Arts, through encouraging the emergence of a culture of philanthropy equivalent to our American equivalents. This would seem to set us up for tax-related benefits  as well as other measures recommended by Sir John Tusa’s Arts Task Force in their report (see www.artstaskforce.co.uk ). Whilst undoubtebly a good ideal, this is largely unproven in the UK as a model, and would be a massive step to take from recent year’s reliance of much of the Arts on public subsidy. Whether this would be a phased movement, looking to replace public with private funding is not made clear, though as journalist Polly Toynbee commented at the Bright Blue event in Portcullus House this week – cuts are seldom able to be able to be carried out in the the surgical manner that might be desired to produce the “leaner” organizations Hunt perhaps rightly espouses.

Singled out for criticism by Tory policy is the proportion of state funding that goes on the administration of the Arts grant distributors, with organizations including the Heritage Lottery Fund and Arts Council England spending more than 10% of their income in this way. The Arts Council is restructuring to reduce this, but the premise does call in to question the balance of spending across other similar bodies.

The Conservative policy of returning more lottery funding to the Arts is re-emphasised, as is a committment to championing excellence in the arts (perhaps responding to much of the criticism levelled at public art initiatives’ over-emphasis of diversity and localism over quality of practice).

And last but not least, we are assured that free museum entry “is here to stay under a Conservative government”.

Following a warm reception for the Liberal Democrats, who invited us to input on their own Arts Policy, the Arts Group is continuing to speak to the Shadow DCMS team around issues relating to internships and STEM funding following discussions at the Conservative Conservative Arts and Creative Industries Network and other events with Shadow Arts Minister Ed Vaizey. Watch this space for formal responses!

The Guardian article is here: http://www.guardian.co.uk/culture/2010/jan/1Following a warm reception from the Conservatives, who have invited us to their network events, and the Liberal Democrats, who invited us to input on their own Arts Policy, the Arts Group is continuing to speak to the Shadow DCMS team around issues relating to internships and STEM funding. Watch this space for formal responses!4/arts-funding-cuts-proposed-conservatives

  • Share/Bookmark

National Arts Student Summit – Be There!

This April, the National Arts Student Summit is taking place. Seeking to channel the voices of students of the arts from across the UK, this is the chance to shape the future agenda for yourselves and for future students.

What’s it like being an arts student in 2010? How is your course shaping up, and are you set for graduation? Now is the chance to have your say and bring your concerns directly to the forefront of the national student forum.

The National Arts Student Summit (organised by The Arts Group) is aiming to take a stronger approach than the traditional ‘feedback survey’, by inviting representatives to bring burning issues and student opinions to the table. Whether you have pressing concerns or high praises about your specific institution or the arts student world in general, the summit is a way to help influence future policy for those who are positioned to feel it most.

The summit aims to create plans and targets that will affect student lives not only in the long run, but also in the short term- so the outcome of this summit could be very relevant to your own student days.

Representatives can include Students’ Union Officers and Course/Faculty reps. If you know who your course rep is, drop them a line with your concerns- their name and contact details should be found on your faculty website or the student union site- and take your voice to the summit. Or if you want to become a student rep yourself, then check to see whether your faculty/course already has a rep- if not, you could apply to become it- or else take a look at the application dates for the coming semesters.

The summit aims to be relevant to arts students and the unique student world they inhabit- one of studios and workshops, which might be skipped over by more general discussions. Overlapping disciplines are also welcome- whether they be architecture, performing arts, or creative writing- so be sure to spread the word to your friends.

The summit is taking place from the 7-8 April (midweek) in the iconic HUBS student union building of Sheffield Hallam University. For more details, click on the link below, and get in touch with Kit Friend if you want to offer any assistance for the event via k.c.friend@su.arts.ac.uk.

c/o jotta.com

Words by Barnaby Tidman

  • Share/Bookmark

Inaugural Arts Group Meeting: What’s It All About?

In the lead up to the forthcoming meeting in Lincoln, February 11th-12th, we poked Chair of Arts Group, Kit Friend, for some more details on what to expect and what to come armed with.

Could you tell us a little more about the February meeting in Lincoln?
The February meeting is our first “standard” meeting of 2010. We will use it to discuss progress and activity, issues facing members, and in particular to discuss motions to the NUS Annual conference in April.

What will happen here?
We’ll be planning activities for the next few months, discussing policy proposals, and holding open space technology. There will also be our fabulous evening social activity planned by our events officer, with plenty of opportunity to make the acquaintance of other Arts-concerned officers and reps from around the country.

Key points to be discussed?
Internships & STEM research funding concentration

Who will attend?
Student reps and officers from institutions with creative courses

What are the benefits of attending?

Opportunity to input into policy discussion and activity, learning from experience and practice of others.

What to bring?
Yourselves, positive attitude to change, issues and ideas from your local activities

Aims and outcomes?
To generate policy and progress for creative students, in particular to influence the National Arts Student Summit and NUS annual conference as well as other activities due soon.

Thanks Kit!

  • Share/Bookmark

UK Olympics: art for Art’s sake? Or just pricy gimmicks?

Robert Pacitti, an art director from Suffolk, has just received £500,000 to create an installation. He will conduct a mass research project on the notion of ‘home’. He will do this through a series of public events, such as a dinner of world cuisines set to feed 1000 people, which will be recorded in a feature film. He has received a lot of criticism, particularly for his plans to fly 205 black flags across the coast, later to be replaced by the flags of the 205 countries participating in the Olympics. This is said to promote fickle “gimmicks over legacy”.

Robert Pacitti next to a model of his flags, Artists taking the lead

Pacitti is one of 12 artists across the UK awarded this grant as part of an Arts Council funded project, Artists Taking the Lead, which has been set for the 2012 Olympics. Critics of Pacitti have raised questions on the artistic value of all 12 pieces, and whether this can outweigh the money that will be spent on their production.

“Will it be any good? And will anybody care?” asks a Guardian journalist at the ATTL launch in March last year. ATTL will be receiving a lot more funding and a lot more coverage than other art projects in line for the Olympics.

It is not a surprise that Artists Taking the Lead, a project which has put £5.4 million into 12 commissions spre

ad across the country, has achieved such scepticism. Cynics are sure to raise their voices when it comes to government expenditure. In this particular case, money is shown to have been attributed to individual artists, and the award of a £500,000 budget may seem a bit like winning the lottery. However these funds will not be feeding the artists themselves but going towards the production of their projects. These are larger than life scale installations that will involve the efforts of many, many practising designers, sculptors, accountants and engineers. In fact these projects are so technically ambitious that a £500,000 budget might not be enough!

Pacitti’s flags and feasts, as a critic called them, may value entertainment over artistic depth, but this is part of a political motive inherent in all the ATTL projects. Each piece does its best to involve the community and to reflect national pride. The Northern Ireland project THE NEST will be a devised musical piece based on objects donated by “the people of Northern Ireland”, which is to be performed in Belfast.

Shauna Richardson, Artists taking the lead East Midlands. c Matthew Andrews 2009

Shauna Williams, commissioned in the East Midlands, plans to build three taxidermy style 30 foot high lions across Nottingham to disseminate the values of courage and nobility, commemorating Richard Lionheart, and “celebrate the region”.

The debate between elitist and accessible art, Ezra Pound over Harry Potter, Tarkovsky over Goddard is made prominent. That the commissioned pieces are neither too obscure nor avant-garde, that no one opted for a gothic performance on male/female deconstruction (followed by an after-party in a Glasgow basement) is part of a deliberate and political choice. Rather this is art that is democratic, it aims to be universally understood.

“Much is being prepared for the Olympics, and a lot of it has received Arts Council funding.” Says an artist commissioned by Art at the Edge, a project organising a public display of sport themed art.  Here, as opposed to ATTL, established fine artists will be creating exhibition pieces, and their audience is restricted to the gallery space. Aimed at the wider public rather than the artistic elite, ATTL becomes dependant on wider coverage, larger scale pieces and accessible ideas.

Words by Lemma Shehadi

  • Share/Bookmark

Unleashing Aspiration… 6 months on…

Rereading Milburn’s report “Unleashing Aspiration” it’s interesting to note some key points that remain outstanding, and particularly relevant as we head into a year of political change, whenever and whatever the results of the General Election.

The first graph that drew my particular attention concerns the % difference between different professions compared to the family income individuals came from. This seems to be a good indicator of social mobility as much as any can be. The report makes much of the distressingly rising numbers “top tier” of professionals from well off backgrounds but the figures around the Arts is of further interest. We sit as arguably the best of the professions on this graph in terms of a drop in those from well off backgrounds, but it would be interesting to query for how many the Arts actually represents social mobility, especially in a fiscal sense.

 

Not Arts-specific, but also shocking is the news in chapter 2 that ‘one in six children today grows up in a workless household’ – hard to believe in a supposedly developed country…

The report is well worth a read if you haven’t already, and the summary is excellent…

Download the pdfs here

  • Share/Bookmark