Golden Hammer: Government spends $695,000 to teach kids filmmaking

The federal government spent more than half a million in taxpayer dollars to teach kids how to make video game-style movies that most can learn to create online for free.

And the technology’s primary benefit won’t be for government, national security or public service, but rather for the movie and gaming industries that already enjoy a revenue stream of a half-trillion dollars per year.

Between 2010 and 2014, the National Science Foundation awarded $695,485 to Georgia Tech Research Corporation to “explore approaches to artificial intelligence that can support creative digital filmmaking, an extremely rich new form of expression and communication,” according to the grant description.

“The most accessible variant” of digital filmmaking, according to the grant, is “machinima” — a type of movie created using 3D avatars like those in the computer and video game worlds like “The Sims” or “World of Warcraft.”

Machinima filmmaking has exploded in recent years, mostly because the movies are cheap, quick and easy to make, and the tools and software used to make them are readily available. Machinima moviemaking tutorials are extremely easy to come by — for free — on the Internet via online discussion forums, YouTube videos, apps and online courses.

But not according to the federal government. The federal grant states getting into the machinima filmmaking business is tricky because the business has a high threshold of skill requirements.

“The goal of this research is to reduce the technological and skill barrier to complex, but rich forms of digital expression such as filmmaking, thereby increasing the creative productivity of amateur creators,” the grant description states.

Taxpayer advocates are baffled as to why the government would use tax dollars to pursue such a narrowly focused program that is easily researched online — for free.

“This is classic government. They’re way behind the curve,” said Douglas Kellogg, communications manager at the National Taxpayers Union. “There’s a bunch of free tools and tutorials before this grant whatever technological explosion is happening has already happened.”

For using tax dollars to educate the next James Cameron on digital filmmaking techniques — easily found online — the National Science Foundation wins this week’s Golden Hammer, a weekly distinction awarded by The Washington Times highlighting the most egregious examples of wasteful federal spending.

“It’s a ridiculous expense because it’s not the government’s job to scout for talent for hyperspecific amateur pursuits like this,” Mr. Kellogg said.

Others say it should be private moneys, not taxpayer dollars, that should be used to develop such skills.

“Providing technical skills to children is a worthwhile endeavor. However, that endeavor is best accomplished via private charity, not with taxpayer dollars,” said Nicole Kaeding, a budget analyst at the Cato Institute.

In an email to The Washington Times, William Bainbridge, program director in the Computer and Information Science and Engineering Directorate at NSF, defended the filmmaking project, saying it “supported research on new ways information technology tools can leverage artificial intelligence to provide new forms of expression and communication for individuals.”

But Mr. Kellogg questioned whether such a narrowly focused grant fit into NSF’s broader research objectives and motivations.

NSF’s Mr. Bainbridge insisted the project could lead to breakthroughs that might produce valuable commercial applications in the future, something the NSF supports.

“For instance, Google grew out of research funded in the 1990s by a NSF program called the Digital Library Initiative, and the search engines that we all use today would not be possible without the fundamental research on computer algorithms that serve as the basis for these search engines,” Mr. Bainbridge said.

Mark Riedl, associate professor in the School of Interactive Computing at Georgia Tech who oversaw the grant program, wrote in an April 2015 article that machinima heavily contributes to modern filmmaking.

Filmmaking is a $5.1 billion industry in Georgia that is heavily supported as an economic development priority. The U.S. has the largest media and entertainment industry in the world at $546 billion.

Mr. Riedl wrote that the program explored new “smart” features for software and tools used to create digital films that give feedback and critiques as an amateur filmmaker puts together a movie.

“Like a Spell Check on steroids for cinema and digital video,” Mr. Riedl wrote. “As a result, we now have a better understanding of what a novice needs in order to be more effective when making content for instruction, information and entertainment.”

Mr. Riedl argued that research projects like this one, funded by the NSF, “help ensure that the U.S. remains the driving force of the knowledge-based economy at a time when other nations are catching up in technology and education and increasing their investment in research and development.”

But since the grant was first awarded in 2010, machinima filmmaking has exploded, and a simple Google search for tutorials yields hundreds of results. The software used to create the movies and characters can be downloaded quickly and cheaply, sometimes even for free.

“If there’s any value to creating this type of program, who’s going to do it? The superdynamic tech sector? Silicon Valley, the place that’s inspiring all this stuff to happen in the first place? Or a grant at Georgia Tech?” Mr. Kellogg asked, adding, “It’s unlikely that they will have some breakthrough that isn’t already happening somewhere else.”

Cato’s Ms. Kaeding argued grants like this, while small on the grand scheme of federal spending, prove that there is room in the government’s research budget to make cuts.

“This grant joins a long list of questionable grants provided at a time of large federal budget deficits. While $700,000 is a drop in the bucket for federal spending, this is an another example that those who say federal spending can’t be cut are being disingenuous,” Ms. Kaeding said.

Congress will vote to approve a 2016 budget when they return from summer recess in September, but lawmakers have been strongly divided over proposed budget cuts for the NSF.

The House’s NSF spending bill would require the agency to award 70 percent of its $6 billion research fund to biology, computer science, engineering, mathematics and physical science projects. The restriction imposes a roughly 16 percent cut to geoscience and social science programs, according to an analysis by the American Institute of Physics. The Senate’s proposed bill does not set required funding levels for specific research sectors.