Immersion 101: Cons & Pros

Immersive. Marketing buzzword of the moment?

“When a term gets applied to everything, it means nothing.” — MtM Reader P.O.

Or evergreen basic principle worth a spot in the toolkit?

“People are tired of surface-level things (possibly because of the pandemic) and want more…” — MtM Reader J.T.

Both.

Let’s clarify something. “Immersive” — in the sense currently loved and hated by museums — doesn’t refer to the actual definition of the word. It means “adding very large digital audiovisual content to physical spaces”.

It’s part of a long evolution of technology in museums, and a longer trend of museums experimenting to engage new visitors.

Cons:
We’re all skeptical. It’s a sellout. It’s not about the actual art. It’s all thrills, no learning. The producers went bankrupt.

Pros:
Before marketing kills it, the underlying principles are important. Because “immersive” …

… exploits the scale that only in-person experiences offer.

… focuses on emotion first.

… generates awe, the museum gateway drug.

… experiments with technology to engage new visitors.

Here’s the thing:
“Immersive” is a superficial buzzword.

But the underlying concept isn’t.

Warmly,
Jonathan