Cultural Policy During the COVID-19 Pandemic
Last year was hectic to Australians. Still on recovery from the devastating Black Summer 2020, the country was struck by the COVID-19 pandemic. Under a crisis condition, many cultural activities and events were put on hold, due to public health concerns. In response to lockdown rules, the Melbourne International Film Festival (MIFF), one of the most credible film festivals in the world (Fig. 1), opted to cancel its offline convention. Instead, the non-profit organisation launched its very first online event — MIFF 68 ½, since its founding in 1952. Going virtual entailed utterly new experiences presented to audiences who were asked to use the streaming platforms to attend the showcase. In conjunction with MIFF’s reimagined celebratory event, this blog asserts the significance of adapting cultural policies to emergencies; additionally, the idea of applying streaming services is a manifestation of policy as authoritative choice, a process during which activities of cultural distribution and production are subject to a top-down political decision.
Just as did many countries, Australia promoted a series of policies in response to a life-threatening pandemic. One of these policies was to prevent mass-scale social events, given the significance of social distancing in preventing virus spread and infection. During the pandemic, the government site (Fig. 2) offers timely updates of rules and guidelines individuals and businesses were expected to follow. MIFF initially planned to deliver its offline showcase in August, 2020. Nevertheless, following state policies, event organisers approached a relatively safe option to distribute the cultural contents. This process depicts how the concept of authoritative choice works in a crisis condition. Authoritative choice is a classical policymaking process in which policies are built upon “rational choices exercised by a singular, unified political actor.” Presented with COVID problems, the federal and state governments repurposed cultural policies “to pursue a particular course of action to achieve a specified goal.” The target course of action was to keep everyone staying at home; and the specified goal of the government was to mitigate risks of infection thereby reducing confirmed cases and death tolls.
In this sense, the government policy was a political decision exercised in a top-down, vertical fashion. It was a mandatory rule with very limited space of compromise. It lays out the means (restrictive measures) implementable to reach public safety as the policy end. Being mandatory also caters towards public followership to ensure Australians’ inaction, during a tough period. As a public unit, MIFF had no bargaining power with the government. The organisation was compelled to cancel the offline event; therefore, the cancellation proceeded to the alternative: going online. Notably, as the format of cultural distribution changed, those with limited digital literacy might need to pick up digital skills — or else, being excluded. In a similar vein, MIFF this year is obliged to adjust event format corresponding to government policies.
