The European Commission adopted the Culture Compass for Europe on 12 November 2025, a long-term plan to guide institutions through an era defined by artificial intelligence, digital replicas, virtual exhibitions and algorithm-driven platforms.
Its goal is to ensure that culture remains central to European identity while adapting to technological change.
Across the continent, institutions are scanning collections, streaming exhibitions and adopting immersive displays. Digitalisation promises access and education, yet it also raises an uncomfortable question.
If everything becomes virtual, what happens to the value of the original? The Culture Compass aims to answer that question for the next decade.
Digital Access, Real Risks
Digitalising Europe’s collections makes sense.
Scholars gain new tools, fragile works can be shared without moving them and the public benefits from wider access. Yet cultural institutions fear that digital abundance may weaken the idea of presence.
Seeing an object online can encourage curiosity, but it can also flatten meaning. A carved stone from Armenia, a mosaic from Tunisia or a fresco from Italy loses impact when reduced to pixels. Some institutions report that younger visitors view digital labels longer than the works themselves.
Curators worry that culture is becoming another form of content, consumed at speed and forgotten just as fast. Digitalisation opens doors, but it also risks making physical encounters feel less essential.
Protecting Artists in the Age of AI
The second challenge concerns artistic creation itself. AI-generated music, images and film fragments circulate at a scale no human can match.
The EU AI Act requires labelling of synthetic content, with full enforcement by August 2026, but artists struggle to protect their work from becoming training data.
For many creators, the issue centres on power rather than technology. Digitalisation benefits large platforms far more than independent artists who already face unstable incomes. The Culture Compass must therefore address not only preservation but livelihoods. European policymakers argue that culture requires both innovation and safeguards.
That balance is still being negotiated.
Heritage as Something Lived
The debate extends beyond technical concerns. Europe’s cultural institutions also fear losing the humanity of what they protect. Works of art were made to be confronted, not merely catalogued. The cracks on marble, the fading of pigments, the heft of bronze all carry meaning.
A digital copy can teach, but it cannot replace standing before something that has survived centuries. If digitalisation grows unchecked, living heritage risks becoming a library of replicas.
The aim should be to enrich understanding rather than simulate experience. Preservation involves more than storage; it requires memory and presence.
A Shared Concern Across Continents
This tension extends beyond Europe. Across the Mediterranean, governments in Egypt, Morocco and the Gulf are investing heavily in digitalised culture. The Grand Egyptian Museum uses immersive projections alongside ancient artefacts.
Saudi Arabia's Al-Ula heritage sites rely on digital reconstruction for conservation. The UAE's cultural institutions champion digital access but clarify that it must serve, not override, physical heritage.
Europe and the region therefore confront the same dilemma. Innovation can revitalise culture, yet it also risks commercialising it. Digital tools can protect objects, but they can also distance people from them if used as substitutes rather than complements.
A Culture Compass that recognises this shared challenge would strengthen Europe’s cultural ties with its southern neighbours.
When Technology Becomes the Focus
Digitalisation attracts attention because it feels forward-looking. Yet the real transformation happens more subtly. Institutions limit photography to protect artworks. Visitors interact more with screens than with sculptures. Some fear that high-resolution replicas may reduce demand for fragile original pieces.
These concerns do not argue against digitalisation; they argue for intention. Digitising culture should not become an excuse to remove public access or replace the physical encounter with a virtual alternative.
A digital file serves as reference; the object remains the experience. If the Culture Compass succeeds, it will set guidelines ensuring technology strengthens culture without reshaping it according to corporate logic.
A Chance to Lead with Moderation
Europe has an opportunity to define a model that balances accessibility with preservation. That requires investment, transparency and a willingness to avoid extremes. Total digitalisation could empty culture of its intimacy.
Total resistance would isolate institutions from future generations.
The approach is straightforward. Digitalise widely but present carefully. Expand access while protecting authenticity. Use technology while keeping human experience at the centre. Culture holds most value when lived rather than displayed. Europe’s next step should ensure that the physical and the digital complement each other, never replacing one for the other.
Keep up with Daily Euro Times for more updates!
Read also:
New Frontier of Creativity, Embracing AI Technology in Visual Art
Digital Bridges: Austria and the UAE
Egypt: The Grand Egyptian Museum and the Age of Monumental Culture
