{"id":125615,"date":"2026-07-10T13:46:46","date_gmt":"2026-07-10T11:46:46","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/cultureelpersbureau.nl\/?p=125615"},"modified":"2026-07-10T13:46:50","modified_gmt":"2026-07-10T11:46:50","slug":"is-de-cultuursector-de-noodzakelijke-polder","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/cultureelpersbureau.nl\/en\/2026\/07\/is-de-cultuursector-de-noodzakelijke-polder\/","title":{"rendered":"Is the cultural sector the necessary \u2018polder\u2019?"},"content":{"rendered":"

Perhaps the Dutch tradition of \u2018poldering\u2019 has not disappeared because we increasingly disagree, but because fewer and fewer institutions still feel responsible for the space between those differences. Whilst the media are, understandably, taking a more distinct stance and technology is organising information in an increasingly personalised way, the cultural sector, in particular, could once again become the place where different realities meet.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Much has been written in recent years about polarisation: about social media amplifying divisions, about algorithms reinforcing people\u2019s existing beliefs, and about a political debate in which nuance seems to be finding it increasingly difficult to survive. That analysis is not incorrect, but perhaps it is focusing on the wrong problem. Democracy needs differences of opinion. A far more fundamental question is who still feels responsible for the space in which all these different perspectives can come together.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Public spaces under pressure<\/strong><\/h2>\n\n\n\n

That question was also a key focus during Media for Democracy 2026<\/strong><\/a>, where editors-in-chief, directors, regulators, academics and policymakers took stock of the Dutch media landscape. Strikingly, the discussion barely touched on the production of more journalism. The underlying concern was how a society can maintain a shared public space when, quite logically, every organisation is increasingly defining its own distinct identity. The International Benchmark 2026<\/strong><\/a>, which then compared that day\u2019s findings with eight international news markets, confirmed this picture. The Netherlands still ranks among the world\u2019s best in terms of press freedom and trust, but it is precisely in strong information societies that a different challenge is emerging: the question of how all these separate perspectives can remain connected.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

We are also seeing this trend within the Dutch media. The recent changes at the top of the NPO, which have seen several central directors and some of their teams leave, are perhaps the most visible example of this. Behind this administrative reorganisation, a broader trend is emerging in which the central organisation is increasingly developing into a facilitator for individual broadcasters, whilst those same broadcasters are further refining their own identities. From an organisational perspective, this is understandable. Broadcasters need members, public legitimacy and a recognisable profile in a media landscape where attention has become scarce.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Diversity does not necessarily mean connection<\/strong><\/h2>\n\n\n\n

Yet it is precisely here that a fundamental paradox lies. The public broadcasting system was built on the idea that different social movements could have their own voice without losing sight of the collective dialogue. Pluralism was never an end in itself. It was the means by which citizens could gain insight into the same society from different perspectives. As individual broadcasters understandably distinguish themselves more clearly from one another, the question arises as to who still feels a sense of ownership over the whole.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Moreover, this trend is not confined to public service broadcasting. Commercial journalism is also moving in the same direction. Major media groups such as Mediahuis and DPG Media are building their strategies around portfolios of high-profile titles, each with its own target audience, tone and editorial identity. This makes perfect economic sense. A distinct profile increases loyalty, strengthens competitive position and makes distribution more efficient. But what makes sense for an individual title is not automatically good for the public sphere as a whole. As every newspaper, every platform and every brand becomes increasingly adept at serving its own audience, the same question arises, almost unnoticed: where do all these different audiences still meet?<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Technology is driving this trend. Algorithms are optimised for engagement. Artificial intelligence makes it possible to tailor information in an increasingly personalised way. Digital platforms reward distinctiveness and recognisability. As a result, every organisation is almost inevitably forced to further refine its own profile. This results in better products for specific target groups, but not necessarily a society in which citizens understand one another better.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The missing link<\/strong><\/h2>\n\n\n\n

That is precisely why the key conclusion from the International Benchmark 2026 is so interesting. The crucial question is no longer about access to information, but whether people still encounter enough verified, original and sufficiently diverse perspectives to be able to collectively give meaning to society. That is a challenge which journalism alone cannot solve. Journalism can bring perspectives to light; it cannot, on its own, organise the space in which those perspectives continue to meet.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The research by Sanne Vrijenhoek<\/a> The concept of normative diversity ties in seamlessly with this. It demonstrates that diversity is not a technical feature of an algorithm, but a democratic choice made by a news organisation. Different organisations are free to prioritise different ideals and serve different audiences. It is precisely this that gives rise to a pluralistic media landscape. However, diversity and connection are two distinct social imperatives. A rich array of perspectives does not automatically create cohesion. On the contrary, as organisations become increasingly specialised, there is a growing need for institutions that make visible how those perspectives relate to one another.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

A new mission for culture<\/strong><\/h2>\n\n\n\n

Perhaps this presents a new social mandate for the cultural sector. Not because culture should replace journalism, but because it possesses something that is becoming increasingly scarce elsewhere. Whilst journalism is compelled to focus on current affairs and technology on efficiency, culture offers context. Museums, theatres, libraries, festivals and exhibition venues still bring people together around stories that cannot be reduced to a single viewpoint or a single truth. They facilitate encounters without forcing consensus.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

It is precisely at a time when artificial intelligence is becoming increasingly adept at combining sources and producing synthesis that this quality is becoming more important. Technology can bring information together. It cannot create a shared experience. Ultimately, understanding does not arise from the technical merging of information, but from people\u2019s willingness to engage with perspectives that are not their own. That requires imagination, context and room for doubt. That is precisely where the power of culture lies.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Perhaps, therefore, we should not judge cultural institutions solely on the basis of visitor numbers or audience reach, but also on their ability to bring different realities into contact with one another. Not by glossing over differences or engineering consensus, but by creating a public space in which people can engage with one another\u2019s perspectives.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

That, incidentally, also places demands on the sector itself. Cultural institutions, too, are increasingly being challenged to position themselves clearly, to serve specific target groups and to make use of digital tools to do so. The logic of profiling applies here as well. That is precisely why it is important for the sector not to lose sight of its broader public mandate. If every institution serves only its own community, the very same unifying function \u2013 which is already under pressure elsewhere \u2013 will ultimately disappear.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Perhaps that is the most important lesson to be learnt from both \u2018Media for Democracy 2026\u2019 and the \u2018International Benchmark 2026\u2019. The challenge for the coming years is not how to organise even more perspectives. These already exist and will continue to emerge. The challenge is how to ensure that these perspectives continue to engage with one another. It is precisely in this regard that the cultural sector could once again become the Dutch \u2018polder\u2019.<\/p>","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Guido van Nispen: De Nederlandse polder verdwijnt misschien niet door polarisatie, maar doordat niemand zich nog verantwoordelijk voelt voor de ruimte tussen verschillende perspectieven. Terwijl media zich profileren en AI personaliseert, zou juist de cultuursector opnieuw de plaats kunnen worden waar ontmoeting ontstaat.<\/p>","protected":false},"author":1273,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_eb_attr":"","_themeisle_gutenberg_block_has_review":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_access":"","_jetpack_dont_email_post_to_subs":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_tier_id":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paywalled_content":false,"_jetpack_feature_clip_id":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"activitypub_content_warning":"","activitypub_content_visibility":"","activitypub_max_image_attachments":3,"activitypub_interaction_policy_quote":"anyone","activitypub_status":"federated","wpai_meta_description":"","footnotes":"","jetpack_publicize_message":"","jetpack_publicize_feature_enabled":true,"jetpack_social_post_already_shared":false,"jetpack_social_options":{"image_generator_settings":{"template":"highway","default_image_id":0,"font":"","enabled":false},"version":2},"jetpack_post_was_ever_published":false},"categories":[15614,16518,11687],"tags":[11589,15469,16531],"class_list":["post-125615","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-beleid","category-featured","category-donatie-gevraagd","tag-diversiteit","tag-inclusie","tag-polarisatie"],"views":592,"jetpack_publicize_connections":[],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack-related-posts":[{"id":100450,"url":"https:\/\/cultureelpersbureau.nl\/en\/2026\/01\/handreiking-weerbare-cultuursector-in-tijden-van-polarisatie\/","url_meta":{"origin":125615,"position":0},"title":"GUIDE TO A RESILIENT CULTURAL SECTOR IN TIMES OF POLARISATION","author":"een van onze leden","date":"20 January 2026","format":false,"excerpt":"Today Kunsten \u201992 presents the Handreiking Weerbare Cultuursector. The guide is the result of a year of research by the Verwey-Jonker Institute, commissioned by Kunsten \u201992 and financially made possible by the Ministry of Education, Culture and Science. The cultural and creative sector needs tools to work in the...","rel":"","context":"In "beleid"","block_context":{"text":"beleid","link":"https:\/\/cultureelpersbureau.nl\/en\/genre\/beleid\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"","width":0,"height":0},"classes":[]},{"id":125198,"url":"https:\/\/cultureelpersbureau.nl\/en\/2026\/07\/het-failliet-van-een-illusie-een-beter-functionerende-cultuursector-door-invoering-van-de-governance-code-cultuur-met-het-raad-van-toezicht-model\/","url_meta":{"origin":125615,"position":1},"title":"Culture Press - The bankruptcy of an illusion: a better functioning cultural sector through the introduction of the Governance Code Culture with the Supervisory Board model.","author":"Steve Austen","date":"8 July 2026","format":false,"excerpt":"Steve Austen on the Supervisory Board model in the arts sector: \"I have attended too many harmonised and standardised exhibitions, festivals, literary events and performing arts events in the countries of the former Soviet Union to expect any benefit from ever-increasing, detailed sets of instructions.\"","rel":"","context":"In "beleid"","block_context":{"text":"beleid","link":"https:\/\/cultureelpersbureau.nl\/en\/genre\/beleid\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"","width":0,"height":0},"classes":[]},{"id":100960,"url":"https:\/\/cultureelpersbureau.nl\/en\/2026\/03\/geen-62-procent-maar-186-producent-meldt-druk-op-artistieke-vrijheid\/","url_meta":{"origin":125615,"position":2},"title":"Not \u201962 per cent\u2019 but \u201818.6 producer\u2019 reports pressure on artistic freedom","author":"Wijbrand Schaap","date":"17 March 2026","format":false,"excerpt":"He did not recognise himself in it at all, Cees Debets told his Royal Theatre on Monday 16 March. The director of Het Nationale Theater was referring to the 62% figure of subsidised performing arts makers who, according to professional body NAPK, 'experienced pressure or (even) censorship when making art'. The management of...","rel":"","context":"In "beleid"","block_context":{"text":"beleid","link":"https:\/\/cultureelpersbureau.nl\/en\/genre\/beleid\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"","width":0,"height":0},"classes":[]},{"id":100179,"url":"https:\/\/cultureelpersbureau.nl\/en\/2025\/12\/in-perspectief-lees-je-met-bewondering-en-ongeduld\/","url_meta":{"origin":125615,"position":3},"title":"\u2018You read \u2019In Perspective\u2019 with admiration and impatience.","author":"Mathilde Hoogland","date":"29 December 2025","format":false,"excerpt":"A critical look at 50 years of Dutch cultural policy: Experience, insight and complexity come together. Discover what Erik Akkermans\u2019 story means for the future of the cultural sector.","rel":"","context":"In "ACTUEEL"","block_context":{"text":"ACTUEEL","link":"https:\/\/cultureelpersbureau.nl\/en\/genre\/nieuws\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/cultureelpersbureau.nl\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/12\/Akkermans-Perspectief-thumb.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200},"classes":[]},{"id":100792,"url":"https:\/\/cultureelpersbureau.nl\/en\/2026\/03\/waar-blijft-de-ai-ambitie-van-de-cultuursector\/","url_meta":{"origin":125615,"position":4},"title":"Where is the cultural sector's AI ambition?","author":"Guido van Nispen","date":"1 March 2026","format":false,"excerpt":"AI in museums and culture is now surrounded by frameworks, standards and policy documents. But where is the ambition? This article analyses three recent visions and asks an uncomfortable question: do we regulate AI mainly out of fear - or do we also dare to give it direction?","rel":"","context":"In "beleid"","block_context":{"text":"beleid","link":"https:\/\/cultureelpersbureau.nl\/en\/genre\/beleid\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"","width":0,"height":0},"classes":[]},{"id":100931,"url":"https:\/\/cultureelpersbureau.nl\/en\/2026\/03\/cyber-hacks-101-van-ethische-hackers-tot-criminele-bendes-wat-bestuurders-en-toezichthouders-in-de-cultuursector-moeten-weten-over-moderne-cyberdreigingen\/","url_meta":{"origin":125615,"position":5},"title":"Cyber hacks 101: what directors and regulators in the cultural sector need to know","author":"Guido van Nispen","date":"15 March 2026","format":false,"excerpt":"Guido van Nispen writes: \u201cIn a sector that thrives on public trust, cyber resilience has long since ceased to be back-office hygiene. It has become part of the cultural infrastructure itself.\u201d...","rel":"","context":"In "beleid"","block_context":{"text":"beleid","link":"https:\/\/cultureelpersbureau.nl\/en\/genre\/beleid\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"","width":0,"height":0},"classes":[]}],"jetpack_shortlink":"https:\/\/wp.me\/p3yKke-wG3","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/cultureelpersbureau.nl\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/125615","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/cultureelpersbureau.nl\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/cultureelpersbureau.nl\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/cultureelpersbureau.nl\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1273"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/cultureelpersbureau.nl\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=125615"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/cultureelpersbureau.nl\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/125615\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":125732,"href":"https:\/\/cultureelpersbureau.nl\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/125615\/revisions\/125732"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/cultureelpersbureau.nl\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=125615"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/cultureelpersbureau.nl\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=125615"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/cultureelpersbureau.nl\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=125615"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}