The art conference held by The New York Times in Berlin last week had some head-scratching moments. Some following the event on social media were curious to see the spouse of the conference host, an intellectual-property lawyer and consultant, on a panel debating virtual reality as an art form. But that was minor compared to the unexpected way in which an offhand comment by David Zwirner was blown up into a confused discussion of how to shore up the position of smaller galleries in the art market.
It is not clear that David Zwirner's offer to pay more for his booths at art fairs was part of a premeditated strategy to deflect some of the frustration toward the growth of larger global galleries in the art market; or that, in making the offer, it would be treated as "breaking news" by the New York Times's social media team or picked up by a number of other art market reporters as an important or significant offer.
What should have been a brief story turned into something else late on Friday when two stories appeared in the art press picking over the issue in ways that were probably counter-productive.
Sign up to Art Market Monitor Premium today
You need a membership to AMMpro to view this article and other exclusive content daily.
You can register today for $90 per month—with your first month free!—or for $756 per year (no free trial period.)
If you already have an account, sign in here: