A genuine question, not snark: land acknowledgments have become common among progressive arts and culture organizations, but do these organizations have actual follow-up procedures for responding to, say, someone at the door claiming Native American heritage and requesting free entry? My point isn’t to suggest that such a transaction could be equivalent in any way to legacies of genocide — just no. Instead, it’s that the failure to follow through with such an obvious procedure makes the acknowledgments seem hollow in one respect, their abstraction. I recognize that acks have many other aspects — for example, as reminders for all involved to contextualize their experiences, to consider the programming in new ways, to think about others’ sacrifices, and so on. Still, it seems to me that it’d be hard to present an affirmative argument that organizations should make land acknowledgments but have no obligation to consider what those words might mean concretely. And every kind of organization should attend to the practical dilemmas its front-line staff might face. Note: I’m not even getting into what those procedures might be — that’s a whole other kettle of fish. I’m just wondering if these procedures have been thought out in some cases.