Vienna museums launch OnlyFans account to display ‘explicit’ artworks

The city of Vienna is adopting an unconventional approach to art regulation, putting its most “explicit” artworks on public display on the adults-only internet portal OnlyFans.

In reaction to the banning of certain creative material including nudity on social media, the Vienna tourist board is now exhibiting art from four of the city’s most renowned institutions on the adults-only site.

Some Austrian museums, such as the Albertina and the Leopold, have lately encountered difficulties while uploading artwork on social media accounts, resulting in the banning of some nudity-themed artwork.

The Albertina Museum’s TikTok account was stopped in July, and then restricted, when it displayed works by Nobuyoshi Araki, a Japanese artist and photographer, that featured a partially-obscured breast.

Instagram said in 2019 that a painting by the renowned Flemish artist Peter Paul Rubens had broken the platform’s community standards. When the Leopold Museum celebrated its 20th anniversary earlier this year, a video featuring Koloman Moser’s work was rejected by Facebook and Instagram because it was identified as “possibly sexual” by the sites.

OnlyFans, a subscription-based website best recognised as a venue for sharing and watching pornographic material, now has these pieces and more of Vienna’s “18+ stuff” on full, unfiltered display.
Vienna is home to “some of the world’s most famous artists […] whose works pushed the boundaries of what was considered acceptable in art and society at the time […] so it hardly comes as any surprise that some of their artworks fell foul of the censors over 100 years ago,” according to the capital’s tourism board.

The fight against censorship continues: with the growth of social media, restrictions like this are now again making news. Nudity and ‘lewd’ material are firmly in the crosshairs of major social media platforms like Instagram and Facebook.”

“Vienna and its art institutions are among the victims of this new wave of prudishness,” according to the tourist board, which is why “the capital’s world-famous ‘explicit’ artworks have been placed on OnlyFans.”

OnlyFans, according to Vienna’s tourism board, “shook up social media by giving creators a platform where they could freely share nude and pornographic content with subscribers,” and “shook up social media by giving creators a platform where they could freely share nude and pornographic content with subscribers.”
Subscribers will get a free Vienna city pass or a free ticket to any of the highlighted institutions, where “uncensored pieces of art in question may be viewed in the flesh,” according to the city’s tourist agency.

OnlyFans itself ran into censoring problems in August of this year when it imposed a restriction on “sexually explicit material,” a move that drew so much criticism that it was overturned only days later.

Netflix: what is the carbon footprint of an hour of streaming in 2021?

Watching an episode and a half of your current series is equivalent to traveling 400 meters by car, reveals “Le Parisien”, Sunday April 11.

What’s better in these cold, confined times than watching your favorite series? Streaming platforms have been popular in recent months, to such an extent that Netflix, which has at least seven million subscribers in France, represents a quarter of French Internet traffic. The platform recently unveiled its global carbon footprint. “One hour of streaming in 2020 corresponds on average to less than 100 grams of CO2 equivalent, or the consumption of a 75 W fan for 6 hours,” revealed Emma Stewart, director of sustainable development at Netflix. Watching an episode and a half thus amounts to traveling 400 meters in a gasoline car, explains Le Parisien.

To better understand its energy bill, Netflix called on Impacts, a calculation tool developed by researchers at the University of Bristol, at the start of the year. The platform offered the services of Carnstone, the firm that markets subscriptions to this supercomputer. The latter is already used by the BBC or English private channels to quantify their carbon footprint and identify avenues for optimization, recalls the daily. Netflix has therefore submitted its internal data to the algorithms of this software. These take into account the power consumption of data centers, Internet networks and devices used for watching an episode. Result: an annual estimate based on hundreds of millions of users, then divided by the number of hours viewed.

A “not aberrant” result

To confirm these conclusions, Le Parisien submitted the results to experts in the digital carbon footprint. “The order of magnitude given does not seem to me to be absurd,” replied Maxime Efoui-Hess, project manager of the think tank The Shift Project. “The environmental impact is indeed low per hour of streaming, but the volume of Netflix subscribers ultimately increases the energy bill,” he continues. As for the research director of a large Internet service provider preferring to remain anonymous, this one evokes “fairly credible” results. According to him, “this carbon footprint calculated at the global level could even be lower in France thanks to its much more carbon-free nuclear energy”.