Consider the following text by Edward Shanken: “By 2000, it had become increasingly apparent that the exclusion and ghettoization confronting the practice and criticism of new media art and the larger historiography of art and technology required an explicit suturing strategy. In ‘Art in the Information Age’ (2001) I argued that by ‘interpreting conceptual art and art-and-technology as reflections and constituents of broad cultural transformations during the information age’ categorical distinctions can be relaxed, allowing parallels to be drawn between seemingly diverse theory of systems aesthetics and the notion of software as a metaphor for art. My analysis of works by Levine, Haacke and Kosuth in ‘Software’ led to the conclusion that in the information age, ‘meaning and value are not embedded in objects, institutions or individuals so much as they are abstracted in the production, manipulation and distribution of signs and information’. Finally, I implicitly applied Burnham’s systems approach to analyse the system by which art history is written. Using Haacke and Ascott as examples, I claimed that the historicization of an artist’s work as conceptual art or art and technology ‘says less about their work than it does about the institutional mechanisms that have created and reinforced categorical distinctions...at the expense of identifying continuities between them.” Which of the statements is/are TRUE of the paragraph above?