So I have noticed a trend. Some arts organizations will insist their curatorial standards are excellent and are the ultimate arbiters of 'fairness' simply because their call for entry is 'blind juried' by 'recognized professionals'.

What exactly is a 'recognized professional' in the arts? Who exactly gets to determine this distinction? I find the notion strange, they keep using the terminology of 'recognized professional in the arts' without clearly defining exactly what this means.

I would also like to point out, you as an applicant have no way of truly knowing their jurying is 'blind' other than their word, considering you have no evidence. This phrasing also implies a 'blind jury' is more competent or fair than the decisions of a standard curator with a good eye, which is not true.

How about instead of implying an arts organization is so 'great' simply because they are run by 'recognized professionals', rather, describe their greatness based on the deeds accomplished and the merit of their curatorial standards?

Eligibility

Rewards

Does this sound like something for you?