PAOLO KERNAHAN
THE ANNOUNCEMENT that ISM 2023 was cancelled probably came as a surprise to few. ISM, both affectionately and pejoratively dubbed "international so-cah monak," became a Carnival staple; yet it's been on state-financed life support basically from birth.
Event organisers volunteered that the festival couldn't go forward without $10 million from the Government to put on a show of "a certain standard," or words to that effect.
Minister of Tourism Randall Mitchell quite rightly remonstrated with the organisation: "...it is unconscionable for the Government to underwrite the full cost of an event that is privately owned."
Mitchell was dead on, although this sage tough love is 30 years too late. ISM existed as a peculiar hybrid - a taxpayer-funded private festival with zero financial oversight. What could go wrong?
Some commentators tut-tutted at soca star Machel Montevideo for moving his Monday to Friday and eating ISM's supper. This is, of course, nonsense. No one owns that date on the calendar. During the short eat-ah-food Carnival season, multiple events compete for patronage.
The problems with ISM run far deeper, raising questions about how we manage the business of culture.
In my reporting days, I covered the troubled trajectory of this upstart event. Every year the story was the same: blackmail, cajoling, tearful pleading - the culture will die if the Government doesn't step in! Oh lorm. The State usually capitulated, as ISM was more than a private business - it was a political tool (and liability if mishandled). The ISM became cultural CEPEP on steroids.
Even so, for years the event enjoyed rapturous public support. The air crackled with excitement in the run-up to the final. People chatted in stuffy, overcrowded maxis about who their favourites were to cop the Power Soca Monarch title or the Groovy and what have you.
ISM was a big deal - it pulled crowds and sponsors. You would think a show that had risen to such significance would never go out with a whimper like that. The promoters had the backing of the State for decades and still couldn't create a viable, sustainable brand.
Where did all the money go? What profits were generated? How was the income from gate receipts, sponsorship deals, television broadcast rights, concession sales, etc distributed or reinvested into improving the quality of the product - making the marketing more dynamic?
Throughout the life of this event, it seemed only to grow bigger in scope with scarcely any word of how it was all going to attract the income needed to endure.
For example, ISM was at the forefront of pioneering a wholly unjustifiable multi-million dollar prize structure. By comparison, The Voice, one of the most popular music competition shows in the United States, offers a top prize of US$100,000. Winners are the cream of the crop and typically go on to have successful recording careers. In TT, we beating that prize in a state-funded competition with performances that, quite frankly, would fall apart on an internat
