The COVID-19 pandemic has raised new questions about the accessibility to culture through the internet and models for its financing. Especially important is the question on how participation in culture will change and how the ability to consume culture without leaving one’s home (paired with the lockdown experiences) will influence the work of artists and cultural institutions.  Currently, the discussion about the influence of new technologies on participation in culture is mostly centered around the discussion on the use of artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning systems. Questions arise on the possible influence of AI on creation and reception of art, and on participation in music, theater, or film events, as well as on the degree to which AI is both a tool and a collaborator for creatives, as well as a support and a companion for consumers of culture. On one hand, AI provides countless new possibilities, including in the realm of establishing contact with audiences, but research also indicates that just like the industrial revolution threatened physical labourers, AI revolution can be a threat for creative professions, especially in the area of mass culture consumption.

The still relevant context for young people’s participation in culture is the influx of young Ukrainians to Poland due to the Russian aggression. They have been included in the Polish educational system, and it needs to be said that such a qualitative and quantitative social change is not without cultural consequences. The relationship between various national groups needs to be carefully tracked in the search of potentials it brings. Work of intercultural consultants must be broadened. It is important because according to a recent report on war refugees (Uchodźcy wojenni z Ukrainy – życie w Polsce i plany na przyszłość)  around half of Ukrainian refugees in Poland have ever visited the country before, and fewer than one in five declare the knowledge of the Polish language.

As research shows, the youth tends to replicate the traditional division between high and mass culture, and treat the participation in the latter as a form of leisure, and not cultural activity. A situation in which young people treat culture as something exceptional and institutional, and not as a fixture of their daily life is a paradox, as for years now young people have stressed the need for acknowledgment of their work, including media such as hip-hop or graffiti. Key in this context would be an intergenerational agreement on treating the area of culture as a relational one, and avoiding firm distinctions among creators and audiences between high culture, and, implicitly less valuable mass culture and leisure.