WHY ARE THE PROFILES SIMILAR?

Up to this point, it is clear that quantitative surveys show similar profiles among those who most access the Internet and those who most attend offline cultural activities. Furthermore, the studies indicate that individuals who spend more time online also attend cinemas, museums, theaters and popular festivals more often; at least, that was the case among inhabitants of capital cities and medium-sized municipalities in the state of São Paulo. In other words, it could be that, nowadays, one activity does not “steal” time from the others. Why?

The hypothesis is that income (understood here as economic classification) and education level facilitate access to both “worlds” (online and offline). The relationship with social class seems

146

ENGLISH

evident: It is easier for individuals who can pay for fixed connections or quality mobile connections to use the Internet more often. Similarly, given that most cultural activities are paid for, individuals with the most resources have the most access. Moreover, indirectly, higher income helps individuals acquire references that build a repertoire and incentivize access to artistic manifestations.

In the case of education level, two aspects stand out. At school, children and youths are exposed to books, films, exhibitions and theater plays. Moreover, they are in an environment that values and encourages cultural activities as a form of acquiring knowledge, reflection and expression. Another aspect regards socialization. As a collective environment, schools favor the development of friendships, and cultural activities function as a way to facilitate these relationships. With the exception of reading, offline cultural activities are almost always carried out in groups (couples, friends, families). Only a small percentage of people tend to go to cinemas, theaters, music concerts or museums by themselves.^9.

In terms of age, the connection between youths and new communication technologies has been thoroughly explored. The ICT Households survey suggests that, in some cases, the differences are not so considerable in the first three age groups (i.e., 10 to 34 years old), but, after that, the

“staircase” emerges clearly. Regarding access to offline cultural activities, the trend is similar.

Here, perhaps the weight of available free time is important (greater among adolescents and youths and childless adults).

Nevertheless, it is possible that spending more time online affects offline cultural activities, but that this is not yet being captured by surveys in these areas. The JLeiva surveys showed whether people went to some cultural activities at least once in the 12 months prior to the interview. If there had been a reduction in the frequency of these activities (from once a month to once in six months, for example), this would go under the study’s radar.

Another hypothesis is that, especially after the dissemination of smartphones (96% of Internet users used these devices to access the Internet, according to the ICT Households 2017 survey), carrying out activities outside the home is not always incompatible with staying connected.

In the cultural field, popular festivals¹⁰, museums¹¹, concerts¹², theaters¹³ and classical music concerts¹⁴ encourage the use of mobile phones for taking pictures and sharing experiences.

The ICT Households survey also indicated that an online environment can contribute to accessing offline culture. The respondents were asked about the use of digital media to look for information about offline cultural activities. The results showed that the Internet is also relevant for disseminating cultural activities (Chart 8).

9 Of those who attended these locations, only 11% went to museums and 8% to theaters by themselves, according to Culture in the Capitals (JLeiva Cultura & Esporte, 2018).

10 More information on the websites of São Vicente City Hall (São Paulo) and the newspaper Correio Popular. Retrieved on January 25, 2019, from http://www.saovicente.sp.gov.br/579 and http://correio.rac.com.br/mobile/materia_historico.

php?id=470668

11 More information on PBS’s website. Retrieved on January 25, 2019, from https://www.pbs.org/newshour/arts/

is-instagram-killing-our-museum-culture-or-reinventing-it

12 More information on Techtudo’s website. Retrieved on January 25, 2019, from https://www.techtudo.com.br/listas/

noticia/2015/09/rock-rio-tem-app-com-mapa-pontos-de-wi-fi-e-shows-veja-como-usar.html

13 More information on Olhar Digital’s website. Retrieved on January 25, 2019, from https://olhardigital.com.br/noticia/

teatro-permite-plateia-interagir-pelo-smartphone/33114

14 More information on UOL’s website. Retrieved on January 25, 2019, from https://entretenimento.uol.com.br/noticias/

redacao/2017/03/06/theatro-municipal-de-sp-cria-bis-para-publico-tirar-fotos-dos-espetaculos.htm

ENGLISH CHART 8

INDIVIDUALS, BY INFORMATION SEARCHED ONLINE TO CARRY OUT OFFLINE CULTURAL ACTIVITIES (2017) Total population (%)

100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0

20

14

6 6 6

14

7 5

Cinemas Music concerts

Theater plays or live performances Public

celebrations, festivals and events

Arts, crafts or antique

fairs

Museums or exhibitions Monuments

or historical sites Libraries

Source: ICT Households 2017 (CGI.br, 2018).

A quick reading can give the impression that the numbers are low, but a more careful analysis shows that they are relevant. The percentages refer to the total sample, and not to the group that accesses the Internet or attends the researched activities, given that offline practices are not the focus of the ICT Households survey.

The JLeiva Cultura & Esporte surveys explore access to seven of the eight activities included in the ICT Households survey, albeit sometimes with different names. In the Culture in Capitals survey, the percentage of people who reported going to these activities ranged from 64%

(cinemas) to 31% (theaters and museums). It would be reasonable to assume that access to these activities in the ICT Households universe is lower, because it also includes smaller cities across the country, including municipalities that do not have cinemas or museums. With this in mind, it is easier to understand the relevance of the figures gathered by CGI.br.

Additionally, the JLeiva surveys point in the same direction, although the questions were worded differently and the sample universe was restricted to urban centers. Here, the questions were not segmented by activity, as in ICT Households, allowing only a generic reading, not by area. When asked about which media they used to choose cultural programs, the respondents mentioned TV (47%), social networking websites (44%), word of mouth (32%) and the Internet (26%).

In sum, even though the online environment may compete with offline cultural activities, digital media have proven to be decisive communication tools to attract audiences to offline programs. In the coming years, it will be very important to deepen understanding of these dynamics, following the example of CGI.br.

148

ENGLISH