By Alan Brown, John Carnwath, Erin Gold, Alan Kline, and Surale Phillips
In 2023-24, with the cooperation of numerous cultural organizations, we took a deep dive into the question of audience attitudes about inclusion, diversity, and equity, which we called the IDEA Study, Phase 1. Current efforts by the Trump administration to purge the US government of pro-“DEI” activity of all sorts have raised many legitimate questions and concerns across the sector.
We are inspired by the public statements of many artists, cultural organizations, and philanthropic foundations who’ve recommitted themselves to the pathway that leads to greater equity. As a team, we feel it would be unthinkable to backtrack on the slow, steady, and sometimes painful work we’ve done to integrate the principles of equity in all that we do.
Nevertheless, some nonprofits face real challenges in this climate – the prospect of losing federal support, or state support that originates at the federal level. We are aware that some organizations have, in fact, ‘scrubbed’ their websites of references to federal grants that address “DEI” in some fashion, while others are refining the language they use to describe their public commitment to diversity, equity, and inclusion.
In this moment of heightened scrutiny, organizations may be asking questions about audience support for DEI efforts. Thus, we thought it might be helpful to recap some of the IDEA Study findings.
The data are quite robust – four cohorts of ticket buyers from different kinds of cultural organizations, including theatres, presenters, and a large cohort of orchestras in all sorts of communities, with a combined response of over 22,000 ticket buyers. It is important to note that this survey was fielded prior to the escalation in toxicity of the “DEI” acronym in the political discourse.
Much of what makes this analysis possible was the inclusion of a question on the survey, “How do you describe your political values generally, regardless of any party affiliation?” The answer choices were: Very conservative, somewhat conservative, moderate, somewhat liberal, and very liberal. We do not equate political leanings with pro- or anti-DEI attitudes. In fact, the data reveal some interesting nuances.
1. Audiences are Mostly Liberal
Across the cohorts, between 58% and 73% self-identify as “somewhat liberal” or “very liberal,” on average. Another 18% to 25% identify as “moderate.” Which leaves between 9% and 17% who identify as “somewhat conservative” or “very conservative.” Between 3% and 5% identify as “very conservative”1 on average.
2. The Political Leanings of Respondents Vary Considerably by Geography
As might be expected, the political views of ticket buyers in different locations vary considerably. For organizations in the coastal cities, the figures for “somewhat conservative” and “very conservative,” combined, are in the range of 3% to 6%. For organizations located in states such as Tennessee, Kentucky, Indiana, Kansas, Nebraska, and small cities in other states, the figures range from 22% to 29%. While aggregate figures show a strong liberal skew, it is unhelpful to generalize about “arts audiences” everywhere. Different organizations are navigating very different political climates.
3. Donors are Politically Similar to All Ticket Buyers, on Average
Donors are older and wealthier than other ticket buyers, as one might expect. On average, however, they are no different than other ticket buyers when it comes to political values.
4. Both Liberal and Conservative Folks Support Arts and Culture Organizations
Nearly half of respondents (48%) who identified as “very conservative” said they’ve supported “arts and culture organizations” over the past three years by volunteering or donating. This compares to 75% of respondents who identified as “very liberal.” In fact, “arts and culture” is the dominant philanthropic focus of respondents across the political spectrum. We note that “arts and culture” would include zoos, history museums, botanical gardens, etc., as well as performing arts organizations and art museums.
5. Not Quite Half of Donors Say That DEI Figures into Their Decisions about Support
When asked, “How much do you consider an arts organization’s commitment to inclusion, diversity, and equity when choosing whether or not to make a financial contribution,” between 35% and 45% of donors report a “4” or “5” on a scale of 1 (Not At All) to 5 (Very Much). DEI “very much” figures into the decisions of 15% to 25% of donors. On the other end of the scale, between 21% and 39% say that DEI does not figure into their thinking about financial support (i.e., ratings of “1” or “2”). In other words, DEI is a strong motivator for some and not a factor for others. This underscores the importance of knowing your donors and which of your core values they respond to.
6. Nearly Everyone is On Board with Inclusion
About 85% of all respondents across all cohorts believe it’s important that arts organizations “…continually work to ensure that all community members feel invited to attend, and, when they come, feel welcome and respected” – scores of “4” or “5” on a scale of 1 (Not Important) to 5 (Very Important). Even a majority of respondents who describe themselves as “very conservative” believe that inclusion is important. Those who feel inclusion efforts are not important amount to 3% to 5% of all respondents.
7. Support for Equity is Positive, but Not as Strong as Inclusion
While support for equity efforts is generally positive, it is not as strong as support for inclusion. In the survey, equity was defined as “the policies and structures that organizations like ours put in place to empower people who’ve been excluded or oppressed in the past, to change systems that perpetuate bias, and to ensure fair and just treatment of staff, artists, and audiences.” About 10% to 15% of respondents, on average, feel that “continually working towards equity” is not important, most of them on the conservative end of the political spectrum. On average, younger respondents (i.e., under age 55) are considerably more demographically diverse in terms of race/ethnicity and sexual orientation, and ascribe higher importance to an organization’s work towards equity.
8. The Great Leveler – Support for Youth from Marginalized Populations
Respondents were asked what “…steps would you most like to see us take toward greater equity, if any?” Among “very conservative” respondents, between 60% and 70% supported at least one action, with “support training for youth from marginalized populations” receiving the highest level of interest. The second priority for action cited by conservative folks was, “reduce the cost of attending for those with barriers.” Liberal respondents cited more steps overall, but with a similar focus on youth and affordability.
9. Differing Views on How Much Influence DEI Goals Should Have on Artistic Programming
Where conservative folks differed considerably from liberal folks was in citing “tell stories that speak to diverse populations” as a desired step towards equity. Relatively few “very conservative” respondents cited this step (between 4% and 18%), compared to 14% to 35% for “very liberal” respondents. In sum, opinions are divided as to the extent to which artistic programming should be informed by DEI goals. Some support expanding representation of stories and cultural traditions, while others are quite vocal about keeping DEI considerations out of artistic planning. This has been, and will continue to be, a highly proprietary question for all arts organizations – how far, and how fast, to move towards equity goals in mainstage programming.2
Post-Script
The work to engage a broader public in the arts is as urgent as ever. While there will always be a vocal minority pushing back on racial equity and social justice in general, the data does not suggest that arts audiences or donors will be revolting against DEI anytime soon. To the contrary, it is reasonable to think that a large majority of audience members will support continued “DEI” efforts, as they have in the past. If anything, the data suggest an even greater risk of a backlash from publicly pulling back on DEI.
As with so many other audience studies, results raise persistent questions about how organizations that strive to serve a broader audience define success. In our exchanges with arts organizations, success is most often defined in terms of age (i.e., the drive to attract a younger audience) and race/ethnicity (i.e., the desire to serve a more racially diverse audience). However, we seldom hear talk of strategies for serving audiences with differing levels of educational attainment, socioeconomic status, urban/rural lifestyle, or strategies for engaging community members of all political leanings.
We hope these results stimulate additional dialogue about what arts organizations mean when they commit themselves to “diversity,” and what trade-offs they’re willing to make to achieve those results.
1 Gallup provides a helpful picture of the political leanings of US adults in 2024, using the very same scale.
2 Note that survey respondents tend to be the more loyal, long-tenured patrons, and that we did not survey non-attenders or specific populations that might be interested in more diverse programming.
Public Dashboard Available
For those interested in exploring the IDEA Study findings in more detail, a Public Dashboard is available with filters that allow AOM community members to examine aggregated results by political values, age, and race/ethnicity, and other key variables. AOM community members without a personal login can log in to the Public Dashboard using the credentials found in the footer of all of our AOM emails.
Please reach out to Alan Kline for assistance. Joining the AOM community is free.