Scribbling on the sky

Overcoming the backlash of the backchannel

December 22, 2009 · 8 Comments


Many of us would remember the recent story of Danah Boyd who had a humiliating experience at the New York Web2.0 expo in late November. This resulted from the criticism and harsh comments displayed via the live Twitter stream at the event. So whilst the audience were watching this story unfold, Danah had no idea what was going on as the Twitter projection was behind her. You can read about her experience here. Since this incident I have heard of a number of speakers who are refusing to speak at events with live Twitter streams projected or even more extreme refusing to speak publicly at all.

Reading about Danah’s experience I noticed the resulting ‘humiliation’ was really caused by a number of events which culminated in the harsh Twitter stream. Danah’s experience was not pretty but we must remember it is an exception.

I have recently be part of a number of conferences organised by my workplace and been party to some of the ‘insider’ workings. In addition, I have had the opportunity to speak myself at a number of events over the past couple of years. From these experiences I was struck that the primary issue in Danah’s case was not the Twitter backchannel (it was just the manifestation of the result) and that the incident could have been mitigated and perhaps avoided altogether. The issue is one of responsibility – from the event management perspective and the presenter’s perspective.

For event organisers

1. Communicate, communicate, communicate
Event organisers need to communicate extensively with presenters. From the outset presenters should be provided with a speaker pack of information to ensure they have a sound understanding of the event and the audience. As the event nears, organisers need to communicate more frequently in regard to the venue setup, available technology, and expectations of the presenter on the day they speak. A contact person both prior to and at the event is also critical. By providing a positive (and easy) experience for the presenter you will assist in ensuring they are comfortable and prepared – which will ultimately result in the delivery of a better session.

2. Create the stage for the speakers
Make sure the environment allows presenters to perform at their best. At Web2.0 expo, there were three venue issues that contributed to Danah’s unpleasant experience:
* the Twitter projection was located behind the speaker – if there is to be a live Twitter projection ensure the speaker is able to see it also. They may not be able to follow but through the stream movement will get a sense of twitter participation.
* the venue lighting – Danah was unable to see the audience which caused issues in regard to her not being able to read visual cues from people and isolated her on stage. Ensure adequate lighting so the presenter can engage with the audience.
* appropriate equipment – ensure the speaker has access to the right equipment to allow them to perform at their best. If the podium is not angled ensure there is a document stand nearby for paper notes, if speakers are required to use venue laptops ensure there is one available prior to allow the speaker to play if it is an unfamiliar piece of equipment.

All of this resulted in the speaker being ‘disconnected’ from the audience and contributed to causing the incident.

For presenters

1. Understand and know your audience
In my (brief) experience, many speakers often present the same (or very similar) content with minimal adjustments regardless of event or audience. As a speaker it is your responsibility to ensure you understand the event you are presenting at. Familiarise yourself with the program to see how your content fits in and most importantly ensure you have an understanding of the audience you are delivering to (this is obviously a shared responsibility between the speaker and event organiser).

2. Turn up early on the day
At the events I recently attended, the requirement of the presenter was to arrive a minimum of 20 minutes prior to their presentation. 20 minutes is not enough. I appreciate it is not always possible but speakers should ideally arrive at least 2 hours prior to their presentation. This is important for two reasons:
*to have sufficient time to become familiar with the venue including the space you will be presenting in and the available technologies;
*to attend another session and/or break to gauge the energy at the event and its’ participants.

The exception to this is of course if the speaker is delivering the first presentation of the day or the whole event however the speaker is still responsible for ensuring adequate familiarisation.

3. Be flexible
As a presenter it is your responsibility to be aware of, engage with and respond to your audience. If you are midway through delivering your session and you have a sense it is not working or there is unrest in the room – acknowledge it (at least to yourself) and do something about it. You should be professional enough to be flexible in your approach and be able to adapt to your situation in order to deliver the best results for your audience.

To sum up: Be prepared!

Perhaps if all of these things had occurred at Web2.0 expo Danah’s experience may have been quite different. But more than that, we can all learn from the experience and ensure we mitigate the risk of it occurring again. So speakers out there who do not want to put themselves back in the public forum, I encourage you to get back on the horse as you have significant control to not befall a similar fate – Twitter backchannel or not.

Categories: twitter · web 2.0
Tagged: , , , , , , ,

8 responses so far ↓

  • Ross Hill // December 29, 2009 at 4:43 am

    It’s worth considering that the decision to have a visible backchannel screen drastically changes the nature of the session – and that may or may not suit
    the occasion. I made a few comments about this after FutureSummit at http://www.rosshill.com.au/article/emergent-events-with-realtime-backchannels/ where I distinguish between having the live wall and having a human proxy (an easier transition). I see a greater shift at work here though where these large sessions are stretching the one-to-many format.. which begs the question, when does the backchannel become the front channel?

  • Olivia Mitchell // December 22, 2009 at 11:16 pm

    Hi Zaana

    I really appreciate your analysis of the backchannel here and switching away from the “blaming the backchannel” theme which has been the main response from other bloggers regarding what happened to danah boyd.

    The thing that stands out for me re: the danah boyd incident was that she was the only person in the room who didn’t know she needed to slow down. This is tragic!

    For most presenters it’s too hard to monitor the backchannel at the same time as speaking. I recommend that presenters ask a colleague to monitor the backchannel. The colleague can filter the twitterstream and let the presenter know only the feedback that will be helpful to them at the time.

    Olivia

  • Luke Grange // December 22, 2009 at 1:29 pm

    Some great points here and I especially appreciated the “Create the stage for the speakers.” For a on-stage presenter visual cues are what they draw their energy from. Watching your audience as a temperature gauge allows you to see whether what you just put forward is being accepted or not as the case may be. I find this is getting really hard the more the audience is head down looking at a Twitter stream and feeding their community with so called value. I wonder if certain presenters will lose their power to engage with the room effectively as audience starts to draw on outside spectators through Social Media?

  • Steve Hopkins // December 22, 2009 at 12:47 pm

    Oh oh oh! Just thought of something else :)

    When using a tweet stream it’s handy to use a human proxy in the room for people on the tweet stream to direct questions at. That way, the speakers are still being asked q’s from th floor, don’t need to see everything on the stream, and the rest of the audience can hear tr question.

    Excellent post Zaana :)

  • Alex Dalidakis // December 22, 2009 at 12:42 pm

    Agree completely. A well prepared presenter is already more than half-way there to presenting well. Equally a conference attendee will recognise a well prepared conference too.

  • Samantha Bell // December 22, 2009 at 12:35 pm

    Zaana, thanks for dispelling limiting beliefs for me – about presenting – & clarifying Danah’s experience through this post & lunch the other day! I love your clear suggestions: encouraging personal responsibilty by the many players & even better presentations.
    I also loved your comment about presenters turning up hours earlier – even for lunch or morning tea – to mingle, meet others, gain context.
    Well done :)
    Sam

  • Steve Hopkins // December 22, 2009 at 12:32 pm

    Really well out together post :) I think the crux is the speakers should have equal access to the stream. If not, the audience can take advantage of the different accesses to information and create power from it (ie – let’s bag her out because she can’t see it)

    I’d also add that it’s the event organizers responsibility to provide updates about what is happening on the backchannel to the audience (to a point). At @futuresummit earlier in the year, we gave a few updates throughout the event just highlighting that people were actually using it…and it was busy. For our audience, this was important as many of then weren’t native Twitter users, so were not use it to engage. By giving updates that there was momentum on the backchannel, we had lots of people approach us and ask “how do I get on?” It depends on your audience, but that was a strategic win for us.

  • Merric Reese // December 22, 2009 at 12:30 pm

    Excellent points Zaana, you’ve done a great job identifying the different areas and how to mitigate the risk of a poor onstage performance from both the event management and the presenters perspectives.

Leave a Comment