Introduction and significance of the theme
Although the COVID-19 years are often seen as a major turning point for digital transformation in the cultural and creative sector, this development goes back much further (Raad voor Cultuur 2022). The foundations were already laid in the 1980s with the advent of the internet, which enabled new forms of cultural production, distribution, and participation. This early, experimental phase was driven by the conviction that the internet would contribute to a more democratic society. An iconic example from this period is De Digitale Stad (1994), one of the first online platforms in the world, where citizens could become acquainted with the digital public space in an accessible way (KB n.d.).
In the years that followed, attention to digital developments within the sector took on a more formal and structural character. For instance, the Virtueel Platform was established in 1996, which served as the sector institute for 'e-culture' from 2007 to 2012. A few years later, in 1999, the establishment of followed. THE, which began supporting heritage institutions with digitization. And in 2002, the first policy document on e-culture appeared. In this policy letter, the then State Secretary for Education, Culture and Science, Rick van der Ploeg, focused on the artistic use of new media and on the digital accessibility of art and culture (Zwart 2018).
The corona years therefore constituted less a starting point than an acceleration and intensification of developments that had been ongoing for some time. Due to the temporary closure of physical locations, digitization became not a choice for many cultural institutions, but a necessity. Institutions experimented with digital and hybrid forms and increased their online presence (Raad voor Cultuur 2022). At the same time, this period revealed how unequal the digital starting positions in the sector were: not all institutions possessed the same knowledge, resources, or capacity to digitize – as emphasized in the advice Digitization as an opportunity Raad voor Cultuur from 2022 and supported by the Digital Transformation Scan van
This acceleration is not unrelated to broader socio-technological developments, such as the widespread adoption of smartphones, the dominant position of social media, and changing media habits. Meanwhile, platforms like Spotify, YouTube, and Instagram dominate the digital cultural landscape, raising questions about fair compensation for creators and dependence on Big Tech (Raad voor Cultuur 2022). Consequently, digitization has also become a matter of digital autonomy: the question of the extent to which the sector wants to be dependent on primarily American technology infrastructures (DEN 2026). Initiatives such as PublicSpaces therefore try to develop alternatives in which not market power, but public values are central.
At the same time, artificial intelligence has made its entry into our daily lives. Although the technology has long been embedded in the cultural domain – think, for example, of recommendations for the next series or custom-made playlists – the potential applications became significantly broader with the rise of
Structure of this page
Digital technologies
The digital transformation in the cultural sector is largely driven by the rapid development of digital technologies. Currently, there are two technologies in particular that are having a growing impact on the cultural and creative sector: Artificial Intelligence. (AI) and Immersive Experiences (IX). They influence to a greater or lesser extent the production of art, the professional practice of artists, the operations of cultural organisations and the relationship with the public.
The rise of AI and IX is largely taking place within ecosystems shaped and dominated by a handful of large American technology companies, often referred to as Big Tech. These parties largely determine the technical standards, development directions, and access to these digital technologies, driven primarily by commercial interests. For the cultural sector, which is founded on public values such as accessibility and transparency, this constitutes a
Artificial Intelligence and Immersive Experiences also share a significant environmental impact. For instance, a ChatGPT prompt consumes an estimated ten times more power than a Google search query (Bronzwaer 2025). Furthermore, given the required raw materials, it is undesirable for the VR headset to become a standard household appliance (Ko 2025).
Artificial Intelligence.
Over the past year, the effects of generative AI (GenAI) in particular became distinctly visible in parts of the cultural and creative sector. Streaming services were flooded with AI-generated songs, while major record labels partnered with AI companies (Gijssel et al. 2025, Ploeg 2025). The Dutch Authors' Association is taking legal action after hundreds of writers and translators reported that their work was being used without permission to train AI models (Mieghem et al. 2025). And in the film world, the introduction of the first AI actress and fully AI-generated commercials led to significant controversy (Urbach 2025, Verhagen 2025). At the same time, GenAI also offers opportunities for artists, the amateur arts, and possibilities to democratize art (read more about this in Bookman #143).
A survey conducted by the Boekman Foundation at the initiative of the Creative Coalition among more than 700 professionals from the cultural and creative sector revealed that over 40 percent of respondents now regularly use GenAI for their work. Text generation and editing is by far the most frequently used application, but image generation and editing is also regularly employed, for example by photographers (Struijke 2025). The potential applications are numerous: from visual effects in film productions to authenticity research within painting (Boesschen Hospers 2025, Schoonenboom 2026). In addition, some AI applications, such as algorithmically driven recommendations, have become indispensable in the cultural domain.
Do you use GenAI for your work?
Within 5 years, GenAI will reduce employment in my profession or sector.
I am concerned about the use of copyrighted material to train AI models.
Although GenAI is widely adopted by organizations and professionals, both in work processes and in creative practice, the adverse effects are felt primarily by creative makers, particularly freelancers: in the survey, nearly one in five reported fewer assignments and income, and among translators, even one in three. Assignments for the business market, in particular, are disappearing due to competition from GenAI or shifting to
In addition to the effects on employment, copyright is also a major cause for concern. Of the self-employed professionals who completed the survey, 90 percent indicated being worried about the use of copyrighted material to train AI models. Consequently, over 40 percent are taking protective measures, for example by including provisions to this effect in contracts or by making use of a
Against this background, the works Raad voor Cultuur currently working on an advisory report on the impact of AI on the cultural and creative sector. In doing so, the Council is investigating what artificial intelligence means for the daily practice of makers, and what consequences these developments have for cultural policy. The report, expected in mid-2026, will contain recommendations for both the sector and the government (Bots and Nijboer 2025).
Immersive Experiences
Immersive Experiences (IX) is the umbrella term for experiences that immerse users in a wholly or partially virtual reality, including:
- Virtual Reality (VR), where the user enters a fully digital environment;
- Augmented Reality (AR), where digital elements are overlaid on the physical environment;
- Mixed Reality (MR), where digital and physical elements interact with each other.
In 2024, the Ministry of Education, Culture and Science launched the Creative Industries Immersive Impact Coalition (CIIIC): a National Growth Fund programme under which 200 million euros will be invested over the coming years to strengthen the immersive experiences industry. CIIIC views immersive technologies – after the internet and the mobile phone – as the 'third digital wave'.
The arts have been experimenting with these technologies for years. The Netherlands has built up a strong international reputation in this regard: our IX productions are, particularly in recent years, well represented at international film festivals such as Cannes and Venice and regularly win awards there (Filmfonds 2025, Linssen 2025b). Moreover, in recent years, immersive technologies have been deployed by commercial companies for entertainment, such as with the popular Fabrique des Lumieres and Remastered (Moorman 2023).
IX productions have not only artistic or economic value. Virtual Reality in particular proves to be a powerful tool for increasing empathy and understanding. The technology makes it possible to step into someone else's shoes, allowing complex or vulnerable experiences to be felt in a safe yet simultaneously immersive way. For instance, there are examples of artistic VR productions that offer a speculative glimpse into the daily life of a person with dementia (A Long Goodbye) or let you experience the world precisely from the perspective of animals and insects (In the Eyes of the AnimalIn addition, VR can be used to bring other forms of culture closer to vulnerable target groups. A recent initiative, for example, enabled the elderly to attend classical music concerts via VR headsets (Elst 2025).
At the same time, despite growing interest, the cultural sector faces significant challenges regarding Immersive Experiences. To begin with, there is a broad lack of technological standards. The diversity of IX forms and headsets makes it difficult to make sustainable choices: each form places different demands on creators, producers, and presentation venues. Rapid technological developments increase uncertainty. Investments in equipment are risky because hardware becomes obsolete quickly and compatibility is not guaranteed (Ko 2022). This also affects the longevity of artistic work: without active updates or redevelopment, many productions are only presentable for a few years (Linssen 2025a).
In addition, a survey among experts reveals that potential presentation venues in the Netherlands lack knowledge and resources regarding the technology. Exhibiting VR productions requires not only expensive equipment but also technical expertise and qualified hosts to guide visitors through the so-called en offboardingThis makes it a labor-intensive and costly undertaking, even for locations that already possess the necessary knowledge (Ko 2022). Moreover, the limited throughput – the number of visitors who can go through the VR experience in a given period – makes it difficult to recoup the investment. A noteworthy homegrown initiative that tackles these challenges is Now:RealitySince 2022, the platform has been lowering the barrier for Dutch art house cinemas to program VR productions by offering a comprehensive package consisting of a curated selection of VR productions, staff training, national marketing, and the necessary equipment (DEN 2025).
Digital culture
“Digital culture is a broad field within which the ever-changing relationship between our society and technology is questioned, imagined, and shaped,” according to the Creative Industries Fund, which provides financial support to the field. From a policy perspective, digital culture falls within the creative industry, together with Architecture en DesignThe digital culture field is comprised of diverse disciplines, including media art, IX, games, AV performances, creative coding, and art-science (Stimuleringsfonds zja). The field is by definition multidisciplinary and multimedia, but also intertwined with other sectors: digital culture touches upon art, heritage, media, science, industry, and technology. As a result, the domain is difficult to delineate (Moonshot Digitale Cultuur zja).
Because the field of work is difficult to define and there is no overarching SBI code, it is difficult to get a clear picture of the number of workers and companies. In a explores From Dialogic in 2025 to policy instruments for stimulating digital culture, commissioned by the Ministry of Education, Culture and Science, the Chamber of Commerce Trade Register was critically searched based on the provided activity descriptions. The exploration revealed a total of 3.858 relevant entries related to digital culture, of which 47 percent were sole proprietorships. The largest share of these entries comes from Amsterdam (18 percent), followed by Rotterdam, Utrecht, The Hague, and Eindhoven.
No separate budget has been included for digital culture in the 2025-2028 Cultural Basic Infrastructure. However, within the categories of visual arts, design, and the development function, six institutions with a clear focus on digital culture have been awarded funding: Nieuwe Instituut, MU, Next Nature, Planetart, Tetem, and Waag Futurelab (Dialogic 2025). In addition, four film festivals (Cinekid, IDFA, IFFR, and NFF) have been included, each with a dedicated program line for digital forms. The Creative Industries Fund has a separate
Internationally, the Netherlands was long regarded as a frontrunner in the artistic exploration of digital technologies, such as computer and internet art. This position came under pressure following the cultural budget cuts in 2012, during which a significant part of the infrastructure for digital culture was eliminated – including the Virtueel Platform, at the time the sector institute for 'e-culture' (Zwart 2018). In recent years, there has been renewed attention to strengthening the digital culture field. In 2023, Cinekid, IDFA, MU, NAPA, NFF, and Nieuwe Instituut launched Moonshot Digital Culture, a joint initiative that aims to increase the visibility of digital culture as an independent domain and better utilize the potential of the field. The organizations map out the opportunities and bottlenecks, with distribution and preservation emerging as key challenges (see also Bankersen 2024).
Limited visibility
The distribution of digital culture in the Netherlands lacks a stable infrastructure. Screening practices rely heavily on (film) festivals, which are primarily focused on premieres and are only short-lived (Moonshot, n.d.). Structural presentation venues are scarce: most institutions do not possess the technical expertise or necessary equipment to show and maintain digital culture, making them hesitant to program it – which is closely linked to the aforementioned challenges surrounding IX. As a result, many digital productions have only a limited reach after their festival debut and hardly circulate sustainably (Ko 2025).
Moreover, subsidies focus primarily on the realization of new work, while resources for distribution and conservation are limited (Dialogic 2025). Therefore, since 2023, the Stimuleringsfonds and the Filmfonds have made a presentation contribution available for awarded projects under the Immerse\Interact scheme (Stimuleringsfonds zjb).
A fleeting character
Due to dependence on advancing technology, digital culture has a limited shelf life. To express themselves, digital makers are reliant on hardware, software, and media that constantly cease to exist or are no longer supported (Moonshot zjb). For instance, a work developed for a specific headset or software version may cease to function within a few years (Linssen 2025a). Conservation therefore revolves around preserving access, functionality, and authenticity, and that is
Without active effort, digital productions are often only available for a short time, and the field risks losing access to its own productions in the long term (Ko 2025). In the Netherlands,
Digitization
Digitization refers to the broad societal process within the broad cultural and creative sector that is causing changes across the entire value chain of production, distribution, consumption, and archiving:
- In the production phase, we see a certain degree of democratization: means of production such as software and digital equipment have become more accessible to a wider audience. As a result, amateurs and independent makers can also produce culture.
- In the distribution phase, digitization makes it possible to disseminate culture worldwide via online platforms such as streaming services, websites, and social media. Additionally, digital technologies make it possible to reach a more diverse audience on location, for example with AI glasses for interpretation (as with The National Theatre).
- In the consumption phase, the audience gains more choice and control over what, when, and how it consumes culture. Moreover, digital technologies enable new forms of audience interaction, for example with AR (such as with Moving Stories).
- In the archiving phase, digitization leads to new ways to preserve and make cultural heritage accessible. Digital archives make it easier to search, share, and reuse information.
This section examines in more detail the role that digitization specifically plays in the consumption and archiving of culture.
Digital consumption
In the music and audiovisual sector, watching and listening to culture online has gained popularity in recent years, partly influenced by the corona period (see the domain pages). Audiovisual en MusicIn 2020, 64 percent of the Dutch listened to music via streaming services; in 2024, this rose to 71 percent. Additionally, half of the Dutch now watch online recordings of performing arts or music performances. A similar trend applies to the audiovisual sector: the share of Dutch people watching films via streaming services rose from 73 percent in 2020 to 77 percent in 2024 (de Hoog and Swartjes 2026). In 2025, Dutch households were subscribed to an average of 1,9 streaming services, with Netflix being by far the most used provider (NVPI 2025a).
As a result of these shifts, a large proportion of revenue in both the music and audiovisual sectors derives from streaming: 83 and 96 percent of the Dutch domestic market in 2024, respectively. For the audiovisual sector, this equates to 79 percent of the total Dutch market, within which gross revenue from cinemas and art-house cinemas remains below 2019 levels. An interesting difference can be observed starting from 2021: while the revenue share of streaming in the audiovisual sector grew significantly that year, the share in the music sector actually decreased. This is the result of growth in the Dutch vinyl market between 2020 and 2025 from 17 to 45 million euros, largely driven by young people (NVPI 2025b and NPVI 2025c).
Share of streaming in the home market
Digital consumption also plays a role within the domain of literature (see the domain page). LiteratureIn 2025, the sales and revenue shares of e-books in the Dutch-language book market amounted to 9 and 6 percent respectively (KVB Boekwerk 2026). The share of digital readers has grown in recent years: in 2012, 17 percent of the Dutch read an e-book, compared to 28 percent in 2024. The physical book still predominates, although the share of physical readers decreased from 79 percent in 2012 to 72 percent in 2024 (de Hoog and Swartjes 2026). In addition to e-books, the popularity of audiobooks has also increased. Between 2016 and 2025, the percentage of Dutch people who occasionally listen to a book rose from 9 to 25 percent. Audiobooks appeal to a relatively young target group: over 40 percent of listeners are between 14 and 34 years old (KVB Boekwerk 2026).
Amidst these developments, there is increasing attention to the vulnerable position of creators within digital distribution models. Although streaming services are often not transparent about the calculation of rates, it has become clear in recent years that the vast majority of creators cannot make a living from streaming revenue. For instance, Spotify pays an estimated 2 euros per thousand streams, and a recent example from the literary world shows that a writer at Fluister
Digital archiving
Cultural institutions have made significant strides in recent years in digitizing and making heritage collections accessible online. To what extent Dutch heritage as a whole has been digitized remains difficult to determine, but available domain figures provide an indication. According to CBS museum figures, in 2024 an average of 62 percent of museum collections had been digitized and 28 percent were digitally accessible to the public, with larger museums generally being more advanced than smaller institutions (CBS 2025). For art museums, these percentages are higher, at 73 percent and 39 percent, respectively. In the audiovisual domain, a 2024 survey shows that 51 percent of audiovisual institutions have since digitized more than half of their analog material (Klijn et al. 2025).
Despite these efforts, it remains a challenge to connect the many separate digitization initiatives and make the material accessible in a user-friendly manner. The Digital Heritage Network plays an important role in this by providing agreements, standards, and facilities that make it easier to bring collections together – which should benefit the accessibility and use of digital heritage (see National Strategy for Digital Heritage 2025-2028).
At the same time, the growth of digital collections necessitates critical choices, as not everything is equally valuable to digitize and mass digitization also brings challenges. Consider the high costs of permanent storage and maintenance, the rapid obsolescence of digital formats, and the environmental impact of servers and data centers. This calls for a conscious assessment of which heritage should be preserved digitally and how this can be done in a sustainable manner.
In addition to the digitization of analog heritage, attention to the preservation of born-digital heritage, such as websites, podcasts, and games, is also growing. The influx of this material has increased significantly in recent years, but the legal frameworks for archiving are lagging behind. For instance, the KB and Beeld en Geluid preserve parts of this digital material on their own initiative, but lack an explicit legal mandate to do so. To facilitate these processes, a legislative process is starting this year that should make it legally easier to archive web content in the future (Rijksoverheid 2025).
What’s next?
Currently, only limited figures are available regarding the impact of digital technologies on the cultural and creative sector. With regard to AI, we can draw on a recent survey conducted in collaboration with the Creative Coalition; the intention is to repeat this in 2027 so that developments over time can be tracked. Some qualitative research is available regarding IX, but quantitative data is lacking, making it difficult to gain insight into the actual use of the technology.
The largest knowledge gap concerns digital culture as a field of work. While data is available for other cultural domains regarding the labor market, infrastructure, participation, and financial flows, this is almost entirely lacking for digital culture. The multidisciplinary nature of the field makes it difficult to establish clear boundaries and develop consistent indicators. Moreover, (due to the absence of industry or professional organizations) it is unclear which parties should be responsible for the systematic collection and monitoring of this data.
Gaps also exist in the field of digitization. Although numerical data is increasingly clarifying the impact of digital distribution on participation and financial flows, insights into digital archiving remain fragmented and largely based on self-reporting. Furthermore, it is still insufficiently clear what digitization requires, both financially, in terms of the environment, and in terms of personnel. Nor is it clear where cultural institutions stand in the digitization process. The data from the self-scan DEN's data provides a useful indication of this: the digital mindset is relatively well developed among the participating organizations, but the strategic embedding of digitalization lags behind.
Want to know more about the theme of Digital transformation?
More literature on the theme of Digital Transformation can be found in the Knowledge base of the Boekman Foundation.
More information about the domain of digital culture can be found on the website of Moonshot Digital CultureMore information about the digitization process within the broader cultural sector can be found on the websites of THE en DigitALL.
Sources
Characters
Netherlands Film Fund. Film facts & figures of The Netherlands. Amsterdam: Netherlands Film Fund.
NVPI Music. Market figuresAmsterdam: NVPI Music.
Struijke, S. (2025) The impact of generative AI on work and income in the cultural and creative sector. Amsterdam: Boekman Foundation.
Sources
BAM! Pop authors zj 'Make streaming fairer'. On: www.bampopauteurs.nl.
Bankersen, L. (2024)Moonshot wants to give digital culture a boost: “We need to break down silos”'. On: www.filmkrant.nl, August 6.
Boesschen Hospers, J. (2025) 'Is AI a great opportunity, or the downfall of the film industry? "It often looks too perfect."'. On: www.parool.nl, 2 August.
Bots, P. and R. Nijboer 2025. 'AI in art and culture: From practice to policy'. In: Boekman, vol. 37, no. 143.
BNO (2025)International version of AI Opt Out Now!'. On: www.bno.nl, November 26.
Bronzwaer, S (2025).Artificial intelligence power consumption will surpass crypto later this year: “It is going through the roof”'. On: www.nrc.nl, May 22th.
BumaStemra (2026)BumaStemra places AI theme at the center of Eurosonic Noorderslag 2026'. On: www.bumastemra.nl, January 22.
CBS (2025)Museums, by province, registration, type of collection and size 2015-2024'. On: www.cbs.nl, December 18.
THE (2025)Nu:Reality; immersive technology conquers movie theaters'. On: www.den.nl, 30th of June.
DEN (2026) 'From social media to office software: how dependent is the cultural sector on Big Tech?'. On: www.den.nl, February 4.
Dialogic (2025) Exploration of Digital Culture Policy Instruments. The Hague: Ministry of Education, Culture and Science.
Film Fund (2025)Two Dutch VR projects selected for Cannes'. On: www.filmfonds.nl, May 1.
Gijssel, R. van and L. Verhagen (2025)AI music floods streaming services with trash and hits'. On: www.volkskrant.nl, November 26.
Gijssel, R. van (2025)Enough of Spotify and the like: many music lovers long for new, fairer streaming services.'. On: www.volkskrant.nl, 23th of June.
Hoog, T. de and B. Swartjes (2026) Cultural participation in figures: Report on the Leisure Omnibus (VTO) 2024. Amsterdam: Boekman Foundation.
Elst, L. van der (2025)Elderly people attend Mozart and Bach concerts with VR headsets: “I could look around the hall, with violins and cellos all around me”'. On: www.nrc.nl, November 11.
KB (n.d.)The digital city'. On: www.kb.nl.
Klijn, A., G. Schippers and M. Zeinstra (2025): Trend Monitor Audiovisual Collections in the Netherlands 2024. Hilversum: Netherlands Institute for Sound and Vision.
Ko, S. (2022) Survey of the distribution of immersive media for the Netherlands. Amsterdam: Cassette.
Ko, S. (2025)Distribution of Cultural Immersive Productions'. On: www.nieuweinstituut.nl.
Koopman, E. and A. Sicking (2026) 'Require streaming services to pay authors more for their work'. On: www.authorsbond.nl, February 13.
Kuzuhara, T. et al. (2022) VR Games Market Report: An Overview and Outlook of Virtual Reality in Games and Beyond. Amsterdam: Newzoo.
KVB Book (2025)Long-term trends in reading, buying, and borrowing behavior'. On: www.kvbboekwerk.nl, 23th of June.
KVB Book (2026)Sales figures 2025'. On: www.kvbboekwerk.nl, 22 January.
LI-MA (n.d.)Preservation introduction'. On: www.li-ma.nl.
Linssen, D. (2025a): 'Is VR as fleeting as a performance?' On: www.nrc.nl, May 6.
Linssen, D. (2025b)Daniel Ernst created a VR experience about the desire to live on forever in a digital world: “AI offers an infinity of false memories”'. On: www.nrc.nl, August 26.
Michel, T. (2026)Writers' Union angry about streaming service rates: “8,5 cents per book listened to”'. On: www.nos.nl, February 16.
Mieghem, M., F. Damen and S. Hofstede (2025)Writers furious after 'theft' by Meta: over 600 reports to authors' union'. On: www.nos.nl, July 26.
Moonshot Digital Culture (zja)What is digital culture?' On: www.moonshotdigitalecultuur.nl.
Moonshot Digital Culture (zjb)Bottlenecks'. On: www.moonshotdigitalecultuur.nl.
Moorman, M.'Immersive' art attracts a large audience. “It seems as if we are *inside* the painting!”'. On: www.volkskrant.nl, 31 August.
NMO (2026). NMO Media Trends 2025. Amsterdam: NMO Mediatrends.
NOS (2025)ChatGPT infringes copyright of 'Atemlos' and other German lyrics'. On: www.nos.nl, November 11.
NVPI (2025a) VOD Monitor: Q1 2025. Amsterdam: NVPI.
NVPI (2025b) The Dutch music industry grew by 10% in 2025. Amsterdam: NVPI.
NVPI (2025c) Music Monitor: Summer 2025. Amsterdam: NVPI.
Ploeg, P. van der (2025)AI music tool Udio is now receiving support from two of the three largest record labels in the world.'. On: www.nrc.nl, November 20.
Raad voor Cultuur (2022) Digitalization as an opportunity: the digital transformation of the cultural and creative sector. The Hague: Raad voor Cultuur.
National Government (2025)Better regulations for the preservation of digital heritage'. On: www.rijksoverheid.nl, October 2.
Ruiter, M. de (2025)AI is fundamentally changing the cultural sector: “It is almost impossible to fight against this”'. On: www.volkskrant.nl, December 17.
Schoonenboom, M. (2026)Doubts about Jan van Eyck: can AI assess the authenticity of a painting?' On: www.nrc.nl, February 9.
Slagboom, B. (2024)AI leads to declining revenue for translators: “Rates are plummeting”'. On: www.nos.nl, September 7.
Stimulus Fund (zja)Digital Culture Scheme'. On: www.stimuleringsfonds.nl.
Stimulus Fund (zjb)Procedure for presentation contribution Immerse\Interact'. On: www.stimuleringsfonds.nl.
Stimulus Fund (2023)Pilot Vouchers for cultural immersive productions: 33 projects selected'. On: www.stimuleringsfonds.nl, 18th of April.
Struijke, S. (2025) The impact of generative AI on work and income in the cultural and creative sector. Amsterdam: Boekman Foundation.
Urbach, J. (2025)AI actress Tilly Norwood is already causing a stir without ever having played a role.'. On: www.trouw.nl, October 1.
Verhagen, L. (2025)McDonald's takes Dutch AI commercial offline after flood of negative reactions'. On: www.volkskrant.nl, December 10.
Zwart, S. (2018)Dutch e-culture policy no longer leading'. In: Boekman, vol. 30, no. 116.
Justification text and image
Editorial note: The current version of this page has been reviewed by Daan Damen (DEN) and Siuli Ko (KO Productions).
Graphics and design: NERD_FUNK by Ali Eslami and Mamali Shafahi, shown at MU Hybrid Art House / Photography: Bram Versteeg (via Flickr).