Alot has been written on here about the death of photographic art and in some cases I can only describe what I read as hysteria, especially those who envision a conspiracy. But is this really the case and if yes why are people not doing anything about it other than complaining? Rather than dredge up material from other people's opinions in numerous essays I'd rather just describe how I see it myself. Personally I see no great conspiracy to stagnate art, especially photographic art. Number one, conspiracies amongst people geographically and temporally separated is impossible. It's hard enough to have a few people keep a secret let alone thousands. You also have to look at the fact that art is the area that is allegedly under control. Anybody who has looked at art even superficially will realize that art is, by it's nature, all about freedom of expression. Most artists I know are almost paranoid about being controlled and especially by large organizations or institutions. Finally, we are in an age of unprecedented accessibility to media. The internet and digital printing has provided the means for people to get their work out without relying on galleries or museums. It has also provided a fast, expansive network for people of the same ideology to meet and organize. Artists no longer need toil in isolation. So, for me, if anybody is really that worried about the art world then they should be using what is available to them to do something about it. To change the face of art to what their own vision. I don't see this happening. The internet has also allowed us to have a good look out there at what galleries are actually showing and what I see is a huge mixture of styles and genres. I don't see the conceptualists taking over as some believe. I see a mix of everything. I think the photoart world is better than ever.