Head on over to the new Wordpress powered Danegeld, set up on 17 April at the Copenhagen Geek Girl Wordpress Meetup and still very much a work in progress, although it has content, imported from this blog.
First new post will outline outlines why I decided to move.
The 2011 JISC conference took place on 14-15 March in Liverpool. All stops were pulled out in terms of amplification, although a few ideas used in the past were dropped as they showed poor ROI (specifically an event network and a live blog). This is probably still my key question about event amplification in general - what and where is the return on investment (ROI)? All too often it remains a cross between 'build it and they will come' and tools for geeks.
Pre-conference resourcesInformation on the event website was comprehensive. Alongside the programme a virtual goody bag was made available, with links to further information and presentations. This was not particularly well advertised in the ru-nup to the conference, which was a shame, as all too often organisers neglect to 'curate' pre-conference and then have to run to catch up later. The contents per session also varied substantially - sometimes there was just a link to the abstract. It was also not clear how far the contents were being updated over the event lifecyle - for example, if a presenter tweeted a link to their slides, would it get added here? There was also a set of #jisc11 presentations on Slideshare, which did not appear to be the same. All rather confusing, demonstrating just how much curatorial effort is required to pull all the resources from a conference of this scale together.
Networking tools
Two third party services were used for the first time in 2011 - Lanyrd and LinkedIn. Both offered networking to an extent, and thus are perhaps the logical successor to a conference specific network, aiming to build on the assumption that participants may already be active on those networks.
Two days after the conference Lanyrd showed 11 speakers, 92 attendees and 64 trackers. The schedule linked to 45 items of coverage, although 37 of these are links, added around a month previously, and look like a good portion of the official conference goody bag. Was this duplication strictly necessary? Little has been added post-conference, and there is little consistency or reliability, dependent on the enthusiasm of the presenter. As it happens I am a big Lanyrd fan, but it's not going to work as a coverage tool built bottom up. Its potential may be more for organisers who do not have similar facilities on their own websites.
The conference LinkedIn group attracted 132 members - more than Lanyrd, however with little in the way of discussion. As with Lanyrd, there was a lone enthusiast. It seems I was not the only attendee who is not a heavy LinkedIn user.It would be interesting to know how successful JISC judged the use of these tools - they seem no more popular than the previous year's Ning network, in fact perhaps less so. But if the conference were taking place in Denmark there would certainly have been a Facebook presence as well - perhaps something to be grateful for!
The remote experience
The organisers bent over backwards to cater for remote attendance, with an ampification guide and a specific online programme (Powerpoint, for some reason). On the day a one stop shop/aggregator was offered by Mediasite. I have no doubt that the logistics and resources required for this were considerable, however I find myself puzzled by the comment from one remote participant, that online attendance at #jisc11 "delivered 60-70% of the value of F2F attendance". For starters, the online programme did not cover the mini-workshops on the first day of the conference, and only one session was streamed at a time. This felt a bit scanty, given all the effort. The online programme offered an online host and live studio chats during breaks, but there were no links from the 'live' programme to these features. Why not offer a combined - or blended - programme?Unlike some I got access to the stream without problems. The set up offered the 'official' Twitter commentary down one side and the backchannel down the other, with slides plus a lille talking head in the middle and the online programe beneath. Apparently it was possible to view the stream in a pop-out window to minimise distractions from two scrolling columns of tweets (actually I think I would prefer to freeze them), but that was not obvious to me, nor was how to comment - maybe I should have taken a look at the Mediasite instructions (another slideshow) after all, but let's face it, that shouldn't be necessary.
There were also opportunities to ask questions, take part in polls and contribute to sessions...all in all too much. I'm not sure about these smart automated aggregator thingies - a plain vanilla video stream with the option to comment would suit me, at least, fine while an event is going on. Shouldn't it be about the content? On which note, the recorded video, when it did arrive, only consisted of the streamed sessions. Several people chased this, and like me were disappointed that coverage was so limited.
Meta-amplification
One session at the conference dealt with event amplification issues, and was itself almost fully amplified:
The intention was to produce a DIY stream of the session using Bambuser, however this proved not to be possible due to the lack of consistent wireless coverage at the venue.
Towards the hybrid event?
A post-conference press release described the conference as JISC's first 'hybrid' event, reaching 300 remote and 600 RL participants on as equal a footing as possible, albeit with differing experiences. Hybrid events can be seen as falling on a spectrum between physical and digital events (this view is disputed by Kirsty Pitkin in Amplified, hybrid or virtual?), with the implication that all three types can be amplified. Amplification enables an event to escape the constraints of space and time, or more prosaically, to reach audiences beyond the primary audience and enable the curation of event assets.
Whether to make your event hybrid or not may depend on who you view the amplification as being for and what form it can take, given resource and technical constraints. Hybrid events seem ideal where the is a large potentia remote audience in the 'tribe' who will benefit from participating live, in particular if given the care and attention of those at #jisc11.
There's a discussion going on about communities, specifically about communities for UX (that's user experience to the uninitiated.)
It's asking some great questions:
One example given is London IA, a Ning network, but whose members "are far more active across other network, communication, discussion and sharing tools and in fact in the physical world".
Amplify’d from www.currybet.net
Once you are part of the network, part of the community, the question that I begin to ask is whether the Ning site has become “the stone in the stone soup”. It embodies the concept of London IA, but the conversation happens on Twitter, the ticketing on Eventbrite etc etc.
You have to apply to join the London IA Ning site - as I commented before this is offputting if you don't feel yourself part of the tribe, but it does give a sense of 'joining' and being a member of something.
Does a community need a home? One side of the argument is that "they just need people...a crowd will congregate when there is something to discuss...the tag is your guide". This reflects the informality of the virtual world and my own 'outsider' behaviour, picking up on topics of interest and lurking around discussions, but raises new questions around the roles of physical spaces and in particular the role of communities on a professional level, for example in encouraging professional development.
Can't help feeling there are some lessons here for those technical communicators trying to establish content strategy communities.
Two tweets popped up in my stream this week on the topic of preferring reading to watching a video or listening to a podcast. Hurrah! I thought it was just me. The information to value ratio for both seems too low.
The tweets:
The Joy of Text (or “Is it just me who hates webinars and video”) - I like to think I keep up with the times. @ianbrodie, linking to his blog post The Joy of Text (or "Is it just me who hates webinars and video")
Plus:
Arggh. Can't take having to watch 10-minute video interviews with content that'd take me 1-2 minutes to read in text form. @peterkretzman, RTd in the run up to this week's #tcchat on the use of video in documentation.
Both discussions continued over the next couple of days. One response was that information should be offered in a range of formats, to compensate for varying learning styles. I tend to feel this is bending over backwards - in the real world this just may not be feasible. But is it worthwhile offering a talking head video, just because it's the latest thing?
Another response is that video can offer something over text - showing rather than telling. For example, the #tcchat discussion (see the transcript) highlighted how videos might be appropriate for visual inspection, detail or tasks not otherwise apparent or easily described, such as medical device industry can use vids to train staff how to clean devices. The chat went on to discuss issues around subtitling/captioning, the need to have a transcript, tables of contents within vids...all rather a long way from an organisation shoving up a vid, and calling for resources and skills beyond the reach of many. Is an amateurish vid actually damaging, affecting a website and hence an organisation's credibilty?
With a lot of podcasts, it shows why professional broadcasters are just that - many sound like they are reading from a script or blokey banter that is a waste of time.
Another issue is the myth of learning styles. Having worked in legal education for several years I was a bit of a learning styles disciple, but a recent Ignite slidecast - oh the irony! - I came across rather pulled the rug out from under me on that one and I've kinda gone back to a version of Ranganathan's a book for every reader - a format for every type of info. See Wikipedia on learning styles entry for more on this. In sum, it appears that catering for differing learning styes generally doesn't improve learning outcomes or the retention of information.
This may all be part of the change in reading habits, another topic I want to write on. Ian states that statistics show that a lot of people prefer video and audio, and some search on YouTube rather than Google - oh the horror!
I'm planning on getting back on the Wordpress bus shortly and using this Posterous for scrapbooking.
Also wrapping up my tracking of different methods of event amplification - it's fascinating ducking in and out of events but it is very time consuming! On that note I came across this great anecdote from Digital Researcher 2011, whose hashtag - #dr11 - was 'hijacked'. I'm not sure if the tweets were archived, but Nora, a real life curator, doesn't seem bothered, finding the value elsewhere.Amplify’d from www.rin.ac.uk
There’s a danger of...the people who love content...talking to ourselves and making ourselves feel good that content is important...content is a tactic or a component.
The title of this post and the quote above are taken from an interview with Gerry McGovern as part of the run-up to CS Forum in London in September.
You are not alone Gerry. I've an issue with:
- content - it's an empty word, no one goes out looking for content, at best they want information
- strategy - something which never gets done
The whole thing reminds me of librarians and librarianship. Another set of skills you get paid more for if you don't mention.
Roundup of the seven events I called in on, virtually or physically in February 2011 - see tracking events for a full chronology and explanation.
Advocating content strategy
Lightning UX on the 1st was made up of eight speakers speaking for five minutes each. Content from shortform presentation sessions like these can be easily captured, and the Lanyrd coverage is pretty comprehensive. As someone at the content end of the spectrum Jonathan Kahn's presentation on Why content strategy is a big deal for UX professionals caught my eye, particularly the idea that unless content issues are addressed a lot of UX will remain a fantasy that never gets implemented.
I'm attending an Ignite Denmark session on 1 March, which looks even tighter, limiting the number of slides to 20 at 15 seconds each. Liking this format!Moving along, at the monthly London IA event on the 9th Relly Annett-Baker addressed copy issues for designers and developers. There's video, sketchnotes from evalottchen plus some handwritten notes, remember them?.
Spot the theme - content strategy for UX, content strategy for IA - could advocacy among geeks be more effective than addressing the 'client' directly? Incidentally, it's hardly a hanging offence but in both these cases by monitoring the event hashtag I came up with resources which have not been added on Lanyrd. An aggregation flaw in their social model?
Now, this didn't start out as snark day, but compare and contrast the two events above with the UK Content Strategy Association February meetup (as styled on Eventbrite), also on the 9th. And. That's. It. Bar some "what fun we had" style tweets. I came across these meetings as I am a member of the Content Strategy Europe Google group. There have been pleas in the past to amplify the meetings, and on occasion it has been possible to skype in, however the group seems to be morphing into a UK based association. Which is fine, but gives the impression of being in dire need itself of content strategy. If not to say a firm hand. Oh the irony.Finally, one strand of writing on content strategy uses words like branding a lot. A blog post on What next for content? introduced a panel discussion held as part of Social Media Week on the 10th. There is a short video and some pretty slides. Amiando was used to organise the event, and looks more flexible than Eventbrite, with tabs for wall posts, photos, directions etc.
Discovering real content
Perhaps what I miss most at the moment is the opportunity to have a tight relationship with a subject area and the community around it, so I can apply new ideas directly and see how they work. But via Twitter I am starting to be able to home in on communities of interest.
Having worked in legal education for the past seven or so years the event on the 17th on The future of legal blogging was fascinating - see Blogging makes lawyers better for more on this.
On the 8th I picked up on Journalistik tæt på borgerne, an annual conference at Aarhus University on citizen journalism, which relates directly to my interest in matters local stemming from earlier in my career.
Hannah Waldram, the Guardian's beatblogger in Cardiff who spoke at the event, commented: "[Danish] Local papers want to enter and participate in the hyperlocal sphere but are unsure of the best route to do so without losing time and money – or the best way to engage or compete with existing sites". Funnily enough Hvidovre Avis, our local paper, is based at the bottom of the garden - well, through the fence, a daily reminder of how it might be an idea to get out there myself.
Hannah also gave a quick overview of three hyperlocal blogs which presented at the conference (one of which, Alken.dk, also got more detailed coverage på dansk.) And on the Danish side of the equation, Peter From Jacaobsen highlighted how the Guardian beatblogger approach goes beyond pure reportage by creating a network of engaged local enthusiasts.
All this is moving a bit away from event amplification, but my physical lurking programme also continued at Web Analytics Wednesday on the 9th. I certainly can't call myself a Web analyst, but as it turned out the first session was less about analytics and more about looking at the effectivenss of two websites offered up by the audience. The second session was probably intended to provoke, with the title The Web analyst who killed Web analytics, and broadly speaking called for forward looking synthesis rather than historical analysis.
What struck me here was the robustness of the Q&A sessions, a feature I also picked up on at Social Media Club in January. In the UK many are averse to giving an opinion in public, but the Danish love of free speech was in full flow throughout. So much for the claim that Danes don't like confrontation! These sessions also tend to go on, and on, because everyone has to have their say, however qualified they may be to comment...
I've previously hinted that I find Twitter streams from events of little use post-event. I've tried out some curation tools, with much the same response - unless a fair amount of intellectual effort goes into ordering and annotating your material you might as well look at a transcript - or wait for someone else to write a blog post.
The problem is that a stream has no structure, and hence makes little or no sense. See this description of the Guardian newsblog on the earthquake in New Zealand
We get the who, what, where information as brief bullet points at the top, with the eye-catching photo of the now spire-less Christchurch Cathedral, but what follows has absolutely no structure at all..
.It's a mish-mash of baffling tweets, irrelevant musings from the Guardian’s comments, contact details for those who want to find out about loved ones or make donations (including one from the New Zealand Red Cross, who actually says it doesn’t want donations just yet, and another from the Auckland University Students’ Union, the relevance of which escapes me), musings from a boffin at that world renowned centre of earthquake research, Bristol University, and speculation on how the tragedy might affect the Rugby World Cup, due to kick-off in NZ in seven months’ time.
Scattered meagrely throughout, like sixpences in a Christmas pudding, are bits of what you and I might call “hard news”.
via Amplify.comLive coverage is great, but it should only be the start of your coverage. As Martin Belam responded, the live blogging format poses a challenge for information structure. But it seems we are all on more or less the same page - Martin also cites a comment from Andrew Sparrow, the Guardian's political live blogger:
If journalism is the first draft of history, live blogging is the first draft of journalism.
Lawyers get a lot of flak from the plain English crowd, some of it probably justified. Don't look at me - I'm a lost case who thought the Maastricht Treaty was a joy to read. And the former director of UKCLE, the legal education centre where I worked, wrote beautiful editorials, away from the iron grip of my writing for the Web guidelines. But lawyers are increasingly blogging and tweeting in the real world - and getting the message across.
The future of legal blogging
A panel discussion held on 17 February in London, The future of legal blogging, generated 346 tweets on the night (see the #lawblogs archive) and the buzz goes on, sustained by some in-depth blog posts exploring issues such as the role of commenting, anonymity and blogging as a career advancement tool.
My perception was that this was a different type of tweeting from the streams I have followed up to now. During the event it felt like the amount of RTing was lower, with most tweets thought-provoking and to the point rather than oneliners. The snark factor was contained too. It felt genuinely useful.
I had another go at curating the stream with Keepstream, despite my view that tweets are raw data rather than useful information. The curation process did allow me to home in on key themes, but these are more fully explored in the blog posts on the event, and the What the hashtag transcript does as good a job.
A recording of the event is to follow, and hopefully for the next event on 12 May livestreaming will be considered, maybe using CoverItLive, allowing the remote audience to be more fully involved?
The law in plain English
One of the key takeaways from the event was that blogging has a key role to play in making the law accessible, and that the ability to explain the law to laypeople should be a core skill for a good lawyer. And as every blogger knows, there's nothing like committing your thoughts to 'paper' to clarify and reinforce your learning.
Law blogs complement legal journalism, with bloggers both reporting and commenting on cases - if good law coverage is no longer a feature of the press, bloggers can fill the gap. After all, lawyers are quick to spot the gaps in an argument and to respond robustly! Complex legal areas such as copyright and libel can benefit from a more conversational approach.
It wasn't all positive - questions of readership and reach were raised, plus the trend towards marketingspeak on both blogs and Twitter. These issues will no doubt be followed up in future events.
For me, it was nice to exercise my brain around a substantive topic again, rather than the endless content strategy and social media gubbins. Thanks again to the lovely @lawbore for bringing the event to my attention.
Those blog posts:
And for an introduction to the legal blog universe in its many shapes and forms see The geek shall inherit the earth.
Articlr, a "real time, geo-located, semantic, cloud based, web driven, socially contextual collaborative journalist mashup" took the prize for best hack at The Guardian's SXSW hackday - and scored highly on buzzword bingo.
Looks like the same kind of thing as Helpful Technology's event buzz tool, pulling together tweets, images, videos etc. In this case they can also be dragged and dropped into a story. Nice example of how automated tools can aggregate content in a useful way.Amplify’d from www.sxswbaby.com
