Transmedia Storytelling is Bullshit...

I love a good provocative statement but the particular one that leads off this post is one i feel somewhat justified and qualified to make. Such proclamations are usually reserved for the traditionalists from old media that  ‘just don t get it’. I am certainly no such person having spent a good proportion of my professional career writing producing and developing in new media spheres. And indeed a great deal of my current research, teaching and project development is in transmedia forms. And yet despite this, I find myself lately saying loudly and in frustration - Transmedia is Bullshit..!

But perhaps my hostility is misdirected; my problem with Transmedia really stems not from the media and process itself but the people who champion and espouse it. My assessment is that too many of those singing the praises of Transmedia have an engrained insistence on tossing the baby going out with the bathwater.

I was at a recent conference that held a panel on Transmedia and it was this that raised my latest bout of ire. As i sat and listened to these Transmedia Gurus rabbit on i kept hearing statements such as “these technologies require a different kind of storytelling” and “the old ways of telling stories don’t work” Now, Allow me to call these statements for what they are…

BULLSHIT !

Empty, vacuous, ignorant, presumptive, absurd and fascicle weasel-word statements that do the cause of Transmedia no good.

Let me be clear, the advent of narrative cinema, radio and TV Did Not change Storytelling. So why would we think Transmedia does ?

Stories in these new mediums found a new visual or aural grammar, new parameters, new ways to experience, but the notion of story itself as an experience and concept did not change. Television Did Not change Storytelling. Radio did not change storytelling, so to the Internet and even Video Games have NOT changed Storytelling. The grammar, the mechanics, the delivery means may alter but the notion of Story has not and does not. Regardless of medium, a Story (by both is most broad and most narrow definitions) is still a progression of events; an inciting action triggering events and experiences, challenges and obstacles that lead to conclusions.

The notion that simply because a story may be carried in parallel across multiple mediums of tv, game, internet and mobile device should mean it is somehow a wholly new breed of storytelling is not just absurd, it is arrogantly ignorant of history. Even the much cited idiom of non-linear storytelling is a myth - an open-world sandbox video game such Oblivion or MMORPG such as World of Warcraft is NOT in any real way Non-Linear. Story in such media is still, as always, a progression from inciting incident (the triggering event, decision or action) through a series of escalations to a conclusion (or multiple conclusions). There may be multiple paths and many parallel story roads to traverse leading to many endings, and the viewer may be free to choose certain pathways before or after others, but this really changes not at all the fact that all the major narrative events on any and all of those paths will still occur in a largely pre determined order - this then that then that. Certain events must still occur before others in order for the story to progress and without progression there is no story.

It doesn’t matter the medium, Story is still predicated on causality - cause and effect, one thing causes another in sequence. Thus I find that Non-linear is a misnomer and misdirected obsession in Transmedia. The much more applicable and useful term is Parallel. At one such conference i attended, a panellist made the comment that “life isn t linear why should stories be?”  which struck me as an entirely ill-conceived and immature statement. Indeed Life IS Linear. It is completely and entirely and utterly and profoundly Linear! It moves in one progressive direction, each action triggers a subsequent dilemma leading to more actions. Birth as inciting incident, death as the conclusion. In between there is sequential and progressive struggle, obstacle, tension and release. Examples such as these point to a blinding effort by too many Transmedia aficionados to desperately exert and promote Difference, rather than more soberly identify connection and extension.

The fundamental of Transmedia is NOT a lack of linearity, nor is it some radical new perspective on what a a Story is. The heart of Transmedia is a Story-World where multiple and often ongoing, stories may be told and experienced and accessed across different platforms in different mediums at different times. This is exciting and relatively new, but it is still Story, it is still the same progression of events and cathartic experience of journey through those events, as has existed for millennia - from greco-roman theatre to video game console.

Tension, action, catharsis, dramatic question, journey, transformation, inversion, character, challenge, desire, obstacle - these are the base elements of Story. They have never changed before when technology has evolved. Why should they change now just because we went digital and invented Facebook?

On the whole my big issue with the way Transmedia is promoted and espoused by its vocal proponents is that it pushed like an all-or-nothing drug. The prevailing mentality seems to be that if you re doing Transmedia you must have everything and the kitchen sink or else you re not really doing transmedia. The result is all too often a central story-world with some viable story off-shoots but which are then bogged down in superfluous, disconnected, pointless, irrelevant, weak or just plain disposable platitudes.

Not every story needs a twitter feed for God Sake! Not every story must have a Facebook page! Not every story warrants an augmented reality game…! Far too many Transmedia projects look like a collection of mindless busy work to keep idle hands amused but which add nothing to the experience. Bottom line is that good Transmedia projects should include only those elements that are Right for the story or experience, those that are important, those that count, that are worthwhile and leave out those that aren’t. Transmedia is a Smorgasbord; lots of choice but the meal isn’t better for putting everything on your plate.

In this context too, we need to be very mindful of our assumptions about what audiences want in the way of Transmedia experiences or indeed who Transmedia audiences are. I, for example, am undoubtably a digital being. I rarely go to the movies and never watch broadcast TV without time-shifting, streaming or downloading. Every story i consume i do so as download, stream, game, rss, tweet, blog, box-set, time-shift, interaction. And yet, even i who live and breathe digital media have absolutely ZERO interest in ARG s, entirely no interest at all in discussing story-lines of a tv show in a forum, never ever want to change or effect the outcome of a movie. I will never be interested in following a characters twitter feed or friending them on Facebook. Indeed, unless its an actual video game i have no interest in interacting with my screen stories at all aside from selecting where, how and when i want to watch .

Now, I m not at all suggesting that everyone is like me, but what i am suggesting is that assuming people want to interact is a a false assumption, assuming because a person is a technology early adopter and digital native means they want to play an ARG is a myth. The smorgasbord metaphor applies here too; not everyone will eat everything on your Transmedia plate. A story experience must be satisfying but be careful about which elements you assume your audience will partake of in order to make the story satisfying. (and if you have limited budget and resources spend the money where it will count - which is probably Not in ARG’s)

The fundamental is that If we want to move to a Transmedia world and get old media enthusiastic about new media, then we need to cease the absurd and ignorant rhetoric. We need to stop throwing the baby out with the bathwater by making false assumptions and grandiose statements about how important and radical and revolutionary Transmedia is. Because frankly, It’s Not.

There is nothing Revolutionary at all about the digital Revolution.

Transmedia is NOT a reinvention of media and storytelling, it s just an extension on it. Just the latest extension in a long history of extensions. Transmedia is NOT a revolution in storytelling. It’s just Evolution; another stage of evolution in a long history of evolutionary changes.

To make great Transmedia projects and to engage creators of all kinds with the possibilities of Transmedia we need to stop talking about the Differences between old and new media and talk more about the Similarities. We need to focus on how Transmedia extends what we know rather than abolishes it. We need to build upon the foundations of storytelling and narrative experience that have survived all the media Evolutions before now, and honour them within a new media grammar and a multi-platform paradigm without assuming or arbitrarily deciding they are obsolete.

Transmedia is Bullshit. And long live Transmedia….!

Comments

[Brian Newman]

Yeah! This is 100% right on. You've articulated many of the things I've been trying to get out, and I attend a lot of these same conferences. So, I agree completely, but I do have a question that I haven't seen anyone address: Might it be possible that transmedia, combined with some other things, could help develop a genre or type of completely new storytelling that we haven't seen before, but only in addition to many other continuations? I'm thinking specifically of the fact that EA Poe didn't reinvent storytelling, but he arguably did invent the detective story. Something that is now a very rich, ingrained part of storytelling, but it didn't exist until he wrote it, and it was only possible because of a mix of everything from photo/film, psychoanalysis, phrenology, etc, etc. I am tired of the "transmedia revolution" talk, but very interested in what new might still arise regardless.

[toenolla]

Well said. On top of being a reality check, remembering that storytelling is an indomitable tradition, no matter the media, makes it easier to approach a transmedia project and get things done.

Oddly enough, Maureen McHugh wrote a very similar piece almost a year ago (and hey, shortly after SXSW, the event that's causing so much stir in the transmedia world right now).

http://nomimes.com/newsblog/storytelling-and-the-illusion-of-authenticity/

[Mike Jones]

Thanks for the comments.

I hadn't read that article Toenolla, thanks for the link. I've added it to the article references.

Brian, I think you've gotten to the heart of the much better question which Isnt about the creation of a new Story Form with Transmedia but rather of new Story Genres. And this is where genre studies and an understanding of what genre does as a tool for understanding groups of stories that share similar patterns, can do to help transmedia projects. The argument might go that its better to understand Transmedia primarily as a new Genre rather than some revolutionary new thing.  As such we need to think about what genres contain:
- Feeling States: a notion of how I anticpate to the genre to make me FEEL?
- Motifs and Conventions: elements and mechanics that the genre uses consistently across many different stories.

Both these are essentially EXPECTATIONS - part of a contract with the viewer. Thus its potentially very useful to consider first and foremost what contracts of expectations Transmedia sets up for its viewer/users?

Now, the counter argument to Transmedia being a Genre might be the same that is often levelled against Film Noir not being a Film Genre. The idea is that Film Noir is better understood as a Style rather than a Genre - a visual style that many films of different genres might employ (ie Blade Runner as a SciFi Genre film that uses the Film Noir Style). To many transmedia practitioners this might be a better way to go about it; seeing Transmedia as a Style of Delivery or a set of Mechanics that can be consistently recognised across a body fo works.

What this implies - and I do believe this is true - is that Transmedia is subsequently a choice, a stylistic option chosen in order to engage an audience in a particular way. The implication of this by proxy is that Transmedia is NOT a Default or an Expectation but an Option; a possibility, something a creator may or may not choose to use (just as they may or may not use a Film Noir style). And this is again where we may butt up against the Transmedia gurus who seem to vocalise loudly and often that Transmeida is NOT an Option, it is the current and future must-use default or else you're not relevant. I'm highly dubious of absolutes wherever they appear and this is just such a case.

This also leads to a discussion of degrees.... How much transmedia do you need to be a transmedia project?

If I make a traditional TV series and have a parallel Web-Series telling alternate stories of different characters or a different time period (a la Dexter, Breaking Bad and Battlestar Galactica) does that count as Transmedia? Or is it not 'really' Transmedia until I have the whole smorgasbord on the plate? I've even heard it suggested that the presence of Old Media at all means it cant be a transmedia project (such utter nonsense)  When i first starting developing the graduate course in Web-Series Development that i currently teach I was criticised by some of these Transmedia gurus for not taking an 'holistic perspective' - that I was being old-fashioned and outdated by focusing on episodic online TV instead of embracing all the other tentacles Transmedia may encompass. Because I didn't have a course module dedicated ARG's, SocialMedia fiction writing or website Interactive Design that i was somehow an old-media blind dabbler who 'doesn't get it'.

Such criticisms seem to me a combination of both ignorance and arrogance.  Arrogant presumptions about where audiences are at, ignorant assumptions about the history and evolution of story and media technology. 

I have Never yet been emotionally moved or intellectually compelled by a holistic transmedia project. I've never felt I Had to go to the website for a TV series because my experience wasn't complete until I did. I've never felt a need to check the Facebook page of a favourite character else I be missing out on something fantastic. I've never run out to buy the game of the movie in order to find out what happened next to a character or to learn how a given circumstance came about?  I've never been emotionally moved to SMS a fictitious character to effect their choice on a dramatic question. I've never felt the urge to upload my own photos commensurate with a storyline for the world to see. I've Never felt I could enter a 'story' from any platform at any time and still have it Move me...!

I have certainly found a great deal of cleverness, quirkiness, even poetry about many transmedia projects but Never emotionally or intellectually compelled. 

Am I alone...?

I have no doubt it will happen one day but I fear that day wont come en-masse for most audiences until we recognise that Transmedia must extend from what we know rather than continually be championed as a challenge to what we know and love.

As a teacher and creator I am much more interested in taking audiences, and the industry at large, from where they are to where I want them to be rather than presumptively assuming them to already be there (or arrogantly demanding they should be). This is the big mistake the Transmedia gurus are continually making. They assume because they live on the digital bleeding edge that everyone else Does, Wants to, or Will soon. Yet I daily teach students 18-30yo and am consistently amazed at how many of them DONT have a Facebook page, DONT download movies, DONT Tweet or blog, who DONT upload videos, who DONT read eBooks and DONT play video games, and could count on two hands the number of people Ive EVER met who have even heard of an Augmented Reality Game.... These are predominantly White, Middle Class, Well Educated, Digital natives who carry Laptops and iPhones with them everywhere. If anyone - according to the transmedia Gurus - should be into this stuff it should be them... But my experience tells my this assumption is arrogantly misguided.

Thanks for reading

Mike

[Mike Jones]

I commented above that "I have Never yet been emotionally moved or intellectually compelled by a holistic transmedia project"

I may now stand corrected. (not entirely but to some significant degree). I have spent all morning immersed in Collapsus: Energy Risk Conspiracy - http://www.collapsus.com/

Compelling, Rich, Moving, Intelligent. Collapsus is both a challenge to my post above as well as a confirmation. Whilst it is able to engage on the level of compelling narrative, character and dramatic questions - it also does so without needing the twee, disposable transmedia detritus that so often adorns such projects. Collapsus is a rich a detailed and complex creation but it also makes everything count.

Mike

[Rab]

I'm so glad I read this. For a while I thought I was going mad. I was attending conferences were digital evangelists were telling me that the future was post-literate (and this was something we should be relaxed about); entertainment would be delivered to our mobile devices in McNugget-sized chucks (5 minutes max); and interactive, non-linear, cross-platform media would sweep away old media forms and content to make way for the future.

I could never reconcile any of this with my own experience, or the experience of the people I know. I'm not some sort of media-Luddite. I blog, tweet, facebook, download etc with the best of them but at the end of the day I am happy (nay, I want) to sit in a chair and have a storyteller spin me a damn good yarn - Alan Bleasedale, David Simon, William Shakespeare, whoever. I don't care what form it comes in - on page, on stage, on (digital) screen.

There's a sort of techno-determinism that forgets the other forces that shape the present and the future - culture, economy and politics? It's followers seem to be completely out of touch with how most people live their lives. Your characterisation of them as white, middle class and well-educated strikes me as just about right. Their cultural. political and economic privilege means that they have the power to assume a hegemonic position in society, looking balefully at everybody else who doesn't share their enthusiasm for the so called digital revolution or can't afford to be part of it.

[Mike Jones]

Very nicely put Rab. so much discussion of filmmaking, cinema studies and media is expressed in polarizing either or, rather than what it really is, a spectrum. Positions of grey not black and white. Too much talk of one far end to the expense of the whole continuum.

[Tara Tiger Brown]

Hi Mike,

When I first heard the word "Transmedia" it didn't really mean anything to me and then I started to realize that many stories I've read or "participated" in could be considered Transmedia. I say "could be" because there are so many arguments over what is and what isn't.

I just launched a hyperlocal interactive story in my neighborhood of Silver Lake in Los Angeles. Is it Transmedia? I don't know. The story is linear, real-time although it can be experienced just fine once it's in the past by just reading it. I'm using Twitter as a means to show conversations between my characters, I'm using Google Maps to show the locations the characters are in, I'm using Tumblr to host the story, I'm using a blog to add more depth from one of the characters, I'm using Flickr for the photos and as a discovery vehicle for the residents of Silver Lake, and Youtube to show some footage in Silver Lake that adds more visual and audible flavor to the story. I mention businesses and events, but because I love those businesses, I'm not getting a dime to mention anyone because this isn't coming from a marketing endeavor, it's coming for an experimental and creative place.

Is it Transmedia? I don't know and frankly, I don't really care, I'm just doing this because I think it's super fun and I am hoping the residents and businesses of Silver Lake learn something new about the rich history of the neighborhood and in a slightly, more amusing way.

I should mention that I'm a co-organizer for the Transmedia LA Group and these discussions come up all the time but I get weary of it.

BTW, if you are interested, the website for my story is http://aliveinsilverlake.com.

[Scott Walker]

There is a ton of hype, misinformation, and even snake oil in the current transmedia storytelling conversations.

It is not a silver bullet for revenue woes. It is not new. It is not going infect every single piece of entertainment. It is not the only way to tell stories. It is not the complete and only future. It is not the digital beachhead that renders analog/old media ways obsolete.

None of that, however, negates the fact that there is value in transmedia storytelling.

Story still matters, period. Even if it's fragmented or smeared across platforms.

Great post.

[nicolas]

Hi, I'm not at ease either with any transmedia rethoric that would make it look like a dogma. Transmedia for me is basically new tools for creators to extend their storyworld and entertain an audience across various media. Nevertheless I believe media impacts the storytelling, because of its capabilities and the way we live with it: radio drives very participative shows that don't result the same at TV with a lean back audience; Hitchcock long opening in Rear window feels better in a theater than on a TV; serials have made their way on TV brillantly, but you don't expect them in a theater... without adaptation. Some media very interactive like PC or very intimate and instantaneous like mobile, modify the way you tell your story, and drive new opportunities in letting people who want to interact do so. This is not a revolution, but a continuous move on how to keep your audience connected. More on Innovation for storytelling: http://t.co/x0VOPQZ

[Mike Jones]

Mark Harris has an interesting post on WHY FILMMAKERS HATE TRANSMEDIA at filmmakermagazine.com

http://www.filmmakermagazine.com/news/2011/04/why-filmmakers-hate-transmedia/

The article alludes to the problem of Transmedia being held back by its alienation of established media artists. And one of the comments left on the article by Phil McDuff (http://twitter.com/#!/mcfuckingduff) sums up what I think is the reality of far too much 'transmedia'.

"Filmmakers don't hate "transmedia. We hate snake oil salesmen who talk non-stop about Transmedia, charge dupes money to attend 'transmedia seminars' and who never seem to produce any stories worth telling. Or, in some cases, never seem to produce anything except more seminars."

Mike

[Peter Giles]

Very provocative Mike, I disagree with your premise that narrative cinema, radio, TV did not change storytelling. I think they all have had a big impact on storytelling and the internet and games are doing it as well. Storytelling is something that is fixed, it's changing all the time and the most skilful storytellers change with it. I had a conversation with George Miller about this - he said his craft as a storyteller is all about staying on top of change. If you watch a movie made in the 60's or 70's it's fundamentally different to a film made in the last ten years. It's not just about pace but about visual storytelling. Games have made a major impact here in our culture and their influence is widespread in Hollywood and independent cinema. Transmedia takes it a step further in breaking out story from a single screen but fundamentally it's about the evolution of storytelling. It's also about responding to some very solid facts about where audiences are currently - split between multiple platforms on multiple devices and multiple channels. It's about trying to aggregate fragmented audiences with new techniques of storytelling. It's not one size fits all but necessary to engage with for storytellers on any platform who want to engage and audience.

[Alison norrington]

Mike
Great post and sums up a lot of the current discontent and influx around theorists who sit on 'transmedia panels' and play buzzword bingo!
This breath of fresh air begins to blow away the smokescreen to reveal the inherent storytellers who aren't caught up with definitions and kudos and just get in with creating stunning storyworlds that are engaging and accessible.
I wonder though, whether the misplaced (or poorly phrased) comment about 'requiring a new way of storytelling' was a lame stab at referencing not the core soul of storytelling itself, but the mechanics around trying to produce a StoryWorld that can fly off onto a host of other avenues, platforms and over an extended timeline?
I don't know the answer, of course, but whilst storytelling is a human tradition that can be defined quite simply - to really craft a StoryWorld to fragment over platforms and still retain cohesion does, I believe, require a fresh look at the craft of it's narrative design.
I agree with all of your comments above - story must be at the core without a doubt - but just wonder whether there is a point hidden somewhere in that clumsy statement made at the conference you were at.
Alison
@storycentral

[Karen Dietz]

Right on! Finally someone is pointing out that the Emperor has no clothes. The hype around transmedia storytelling has left me queasy and I find myself rolling my eyes a lot at all the hype. You've made excellent points here. Let's keep them front and center. I'm adding your post to my curated content. Many thanks!

[Simon Staffans]

Mike,

thanks for the post, which I apparently managed to miss last spring. I fully - as people above - agree with your sentiments; transmedia is an evolution, definitely not a revolution. "Snake oil", as Scott wrote, sums up a fair amount of the hype around transmedia.

That said, new technologies do not DEMAND new ways of telling stories, but they sure do ENABLE them. So, why not make use of the possibilities given to us as storytellers? When it makes sense in the context of the story and the story world, naturally.

I'm definitely all for transmedia, simply because from my point of view it just opens up so many possibilities. Choosing the right ones and the best ones is one of the hardest parts of developing and designing transmedia, IMHO.

Looking forward to reading more from you!

best

Simon

[mediabastard]

yea yadda yadda.. except didnt you realize that stories are already extint? ;) we are a fast becoming a borg race of non sequitor feelarama freaks....

access Woody Allen: Sleeper- orgasmatron.

Transhumanism is the Transmediates agenda... that and getting famous and rich before "narratives" enslave us all again...;)

Transmediate all the comicbook IPs we like, just keep it away from "social good"..;0

and yeah, storyworld trumps "stories" everytime.... writers are scared..and well should they be... 4 out of 5 post literates recommend transmedia created crap. ( As seen on TV);)

[Julian McCrea]

Hi Mike,

Love this post. I think people forget that stories need to be told to an audience - and that this has been happening over thousands of years.

All that has changed is the medium in which we tell the story to the audience; from the campfire, to the book, to radio, television, film, video game, to what we have today; a number of platforms that can be connected up. This does not change the story - it just changes the way the audience receive the story.

To that point, I set up the Immersive Writing Lab in London with BBC Writers Room. It is an event for writers to widen their creative pallette and understand how to tell stories on newish platforms. Importantly, we are not saying the writers can't tell stories; we are saying how could we tell a story with all the platforms we have available today?

http://www.immersivewritinglab.com/

Thanks again for this post!

Julian

[Mike Jones]

Thanks for the comment Julian. The BBC Writers Room project sounds great.

Funny how this post has suddenly attracted a lot of attention again.

It strikes me that the very simple key elements storytellers need to really consider in a multiplatform world is Scale and Sustainability. The raw components of narrative are largely medium independant - inciting incidents, dramatic questions, escalations, inversions, transformations, genres, archetypes, character wants, needs, obstacles and catharsis - BUT when your story is potentially going to cross and intersect a spectrum of media platforms then it will need Scale and Sustainability. And this brngs us to the heart of Transmedia - the Storyworld and its natural dramatics. Transmedia stroytellers need to think big and rich and here the old feature-film narrative paradigms run very thin in multiplatform world. Transmedia storytellers need to look to Novels and TV rather than feature films for narrative inspiration.

Thanks for reading.

Mike

[Julian McCrea]

Hi Mike,

Again I think you and I are on the same page - can we take this conversation offline?

I am doing some work in this area for the festival and it would be good to chat it through.

My email is julian@portalentertainment.co.uk

Speak soon,

Julian

[James Marshall]

Hi Mike,
I have to agree with Peter that the way we tell, share, and receive stories has changed over time, especially with new techniques and technologies. That said, I completely understand the desire to rail against the evangelists and fanatics who declare that everything will be different in the glorious new interactive future. People are excited with their new toy, and have declared all previous toys extinct, but over time talented individuals will emerge who are able to craft art with Transmedia tools. There's no doubt it has allowed change, but it certainly hasn't forced everything else into the rubbish tip.

[Lorraine Hopping Egan]

Hi Mike, I somehow missed this post, too, until now. It's clearly resonating.

I've been hearing the same kinds of pie-eyed comments about transmedia. I think the enthusiasm and creative drive are infectious, though, and agree with the heart of your message:

"good Transmedia projects should include only those elements that are Right for the story or experience, those that are important, those that count, that are worthwhile and leave out those that aren’t. Transmedia is a Smorgasbord; lots of choice but the meal isn’t better for putting everything on your plate...." and not everyone will eat everything on the plate.

I would add that good transmedia also uses whatever medium involved to its best advantage. The real strength is in understanding how best to make use of, say, the 2D sequential art platform of a graphic novel while downplaying its weaknesses (entirely visual medium, static). It's not at all about reinventing storytelling, as you so well stated, but rather about perfecting the art and science of the craft for maximum effect.

If that sounds a little too left-brained, I will also say that, as a writer, those brain gymnastics are fun.

Great post, insightful comments and discussion. Thank you all.

[Hugh Cann]

A sobering frankness and refreshing to remind us that ultimately the story is the experience and the care that is needed in determining its delivery and the need to avoid encumbering it. But for some projects and stories multi platform offers a means for the audience to engage and enrich the story experience. As Mike Jones states, though this is not necessarily the case for just any story. I do believe the 3 stories I am currently working on are served by being delivered in a multi platform format as will be the audience by the opportunity to engage.
But I am working toward an opportunity that Transmedia / Multi Platform production may not only enrich a particular story delivery and audience experience of the particular tale but also with development and understanding serve to gradually aid in releasing producers, directors and writers from the almost mandatory over reliance on state funding agencies