The irony of progressive media is time. Again: deadline pressures overwhelm, and so does public opinion. An effective strategy of representation doesn’t move. When information moves faster than authorship, narrative regularity undermines the transformative potential of media. When the scale of media outperforms catastrophe, any disjuncture must be absorbed back into narrative push: the news isn’t good, but at least it’s a familiar story.
“…the problem was the lack of context and it put the employees in a bind—it was done without any of the typical protocols 
,” Artforum's publishers stated. In part 1, I left off on how organizations profit from the displacement of responsibility through divisions in authority. Editor-in-chief David Velasco wasn’t responsible for the magazine’s reputation in the densely knit New York City art world, he mortgaged his reputation on that magazine.
Sounds like Penske gave Velasco carte blanche-- not because he respected him-- but because he was cheaper to manage that way. That the market exploits the presence of art activists without having to waste managerial resources trying to organize them, because they organize themselves, is a tit as old as time. The quotes pulled in Vanity Fair’s coverage from Velasco’s colleagues make it sound like he’s dead, but as far as I’m concerned, his capability of adding value to himself and to others extends far beyond the reach of whatever org chart he is chained to.
Does professionalism have a metaphysics? The publishers stepped in as the ultimate authority when backlash over the open letter cost the magazine the loyalty of advertising clients. There is an equal and possible universe that it could have gone over well.
Velasco was at first criticized for taking on too much editorial authority, then punished for being unable to recover an organizational position.
Artforum isn’t the only organization downsizing. With companies laying off legions of employees left and right due to “market conditions”, how do Artforum’s publishers benefit from what’s become a boycott on behalf of 600 writers who are now refusing to write for any Penske owned art publication? Rather than give the people what they want, the publishers seem to be looking forward to a fresh new start.
Artforum is not a state, but a bureaucracy. Most art institutions are. Despite the glamour and prestige of being a museum director, an art critic or an associate at Pace, these are more or less white collar roles with more or less bureaucratic norms. There is a more or less clear cut division of labor, even when division of roles occur as somewhat blurry. These duties are organized hierarchically, and governed by a set of abstract directives. It’s this governance by rule, rather than charisma or social authority, that make bureaucracies efficient.
As I mentioned previously, I signed AN OPEN LETTER FROM THE ART COMMUNITY TO CULTURAL ORGANIZATIONS without reading it. I did not sign by imposition or prior agreement, but out of voluntary consent based on norms that had been established, previously, by art history and by Artforum’s role in latter half of the 2010’s as an activist institution. These contexts establish a framework for carrying out the same decisions - to sign an open-letter, to take a stand - at times other than the immediate. Going off the number of people who later retracted their signatures from the open letter, I’d say it was obedience, lack of discretion and external influence that compelled them to sign rather than any political or humanitarian commitment.
“Senior members of the editorial department were not consulted prior to its publication,” the publishers stated. “This is not consistent with the company’s editorial process when individual editors are actively involved in the content they are covering.”
It’s vague what “active involvement” means: informal face-to-face discussion is probably what took place. But direct supervision— involving monitoring of progress and the delegation of supervisors— is what’s implied. But we know that this organization, like most others in art, standardize work processes only to the extent the output is standardized. References to norms, criteria or other results-based coordination mechanisms cost less than training. The organization of Artforum, like every other “lean firm”, relies on experts, not supervisors.
As it stands, Artforum is without editorial leadership. A statement made by the publishers emphasizes that they are waiting for the right “fit”. But even when they do appoint someone willing to break the strikeline, they’ll have the “Rebecca syndrome” to face.
Velasco was much loved. Anyone brought in from the outside will look towards Penske for guidance, and in this case, will have little support. A backbone cabal of editors will have great expectations for who an editor is and what they should represent. We expect these writers to be working behind the scenes under the condition that they are not named, and that any resentment they harbor towards the publishers will be directed at the new hire precisely for their reliance on them. Velasco was someone the contributors knew personally. Those relationships were relied upon more than org protocol. The new hire must then establish new official channels, which will piss people off.
Maybe this person is incredibly charismatic. That works for three out of four of the above. New chief should be prepared for at least a few semesters of socially motivated professional insecurity. Who knows? Maybe “helicopter boss” is the new office therapist.
Ideally Artforum is looking for someone who can bring in new people with whom a rapport has already been established. It’s quite likely that the amount of time it’s taken Penske media to find an editor-in-chief is due to the number of people that will have to be strategically replaced in order for the magazine to function.
Replacing the team will take time, so more reports to Penske will have to be filed and more rules and more enforcement of rules will have to be established— if only to back up upper-management’s claim that there were rules to begin with.
But this is a problem with succession, not a problem inherent to the art world. Yet with so many institutions downsizing in the wake of political polarization, we can expect a lot of bureaucracy because business is having to deal with informal elements of the art system that are out of their control. As a new stream of people come to the head, a new set of working rules will develop.