So I’m one of those people that conference speakers hate. I sit in the audience, 17” Powerbook open in my lap, with IRC windows, AIM chats, blog entry screens, and web pages drawing my attention away from their faces.
The thing is, they really don’t have any less of my attention than they used to, before I started multitasking in meetings. It’s just more visually obvious now.
Believe it or not, I really can type and listen at the same time. And often the typing is directly related to the listening. I’m taking notes by blogging the session, or I’m asking questions about the presentation of the conference IRC channel, or I’m pulling up web pages that the speakers are discussing.
I’ve blogged about backchannel before, and I’m increasingly convinced that my initial impressions at Supernova were on target. I can consistently identify three modes in a non-projected IRC channel—and a fourth that kicks in when the channel is public (or the hecklebot is in play).
The first three modes are dependent on two variables—the quality of the speaker, and the relevance (to the audience) of the content.
- good content + great speaker(s) = near silence in the backchannel, as people focus their attention entirely on the stage
- good content - great speaker(s) = lively relevant chatter in the backchannel, with questions, annotations, challenges, and links
- poor content = lively (and often snarky) backchannel that drifts entirely away from the topic
The fourth mode comes into play when someone (typically Joi Ito) projects the conference IRC channel on the screen during a presentation. This creates a significant shift in the environment. The people in the physical room tend to be more cautious, since they can see their words being projected publicly—they lose the sense of semi-private camaraderie that IRC often creates. But more significantly, the people not in the physical space seem to become much more disruptive in their behavior. The channel gets flooded with not-on-topic comments, a flurry of what’s essentially “hey, mom, look at me! i’m on the screen in another city!”
I had high hopes for the hecklebot and projected channel idea, thinking it would provide a valuable feedback loop for panelists. (In fact, I think I was the first person to project #joiito in a conference, back in July during Supernova.) But I no longer think that’s the case. I think that once it’s brought out of the perceived privacy of the individual screen—where each user can control whether or not they see the conversation—and pushed into the physical space, the channel becomes the focus of attention in a negative way.
(Happily, the panel I’m in has shifted into “great speakers + great content” mode, so I’m turning my attention back to the room itself.)
1. Lilia on March 15, 2004 1:44 PM writes...
Just wonder: is there anyone doing research on conference backchannelling? I think it's an interesting topic, also related with the question "what happens ones technology makes private things visible?"
Permalink to Comment2. Liz Lawley on March 15, 2004 3:24 PM writes...
Lilia, I don't know of any research. It's a relatively new phenomeon, I think, supported by the rise in wireless and laptops at conferences.
I'm starting to log a little more of the conference backchannel here, and will start remotely monitoring some in the future to see if there's sufficient data to base research conclusions on...
Permalink to Comment3. anon on March 15, 2004 3:34 PM writes...
The largest, and perhaps most telling, collection of subjects that might be surveyed for such research efforts are of course found on university campus. The policies adopted by the professors - and the technical support provided by the university - are as telling an indicator of the quality of the content as anything else. I distinctly recall - as among the earliest adopters - professors who would pitch fits over laptops in class, and could not concieve of the ability to hold more than one thought stream at a time. It is a sad commentary, but many of these professors are simply in love with the idea that they are for a few short hours the sole center of attention - and their other behaviors (grading, feedback to students) also tend to reinforce this. A backchannel - or heavens forbid other sources to fact check the sometimes political assertations - is simply too disruptive for them to handle.
Of course, now that I teach I often wonder if what impact I am seeking to achieve is being diluted by such channels for some (inattentive, unmotivated) students. But for others, I am confident that they take away as much as they would otherwise - and after all, they are paying for the experience.
Permalink to Comment4. Scott Moore on March 15, 2004 7:33 PM writes...
Liz, I haven't had the opportunity to experience much conference back-channeling, but your first three modes are spot-on for the audience chat channels of auditorium online chat events.
The fourth mode is not always present since the interviewed guests in these venues are rarely adept at fast chat style reading and typing. However, when it does happen, it generally produces a more interesting, satisfying time for speaker and audience.
What about the speaker having a viewable screen of the back-channel? Keep some social pressure to not insult the speaker and reduce some incentive for public "Hi, Mom!" messages.
Permalink to Comment5. mtl3p on March 16, 2004 1:36 AM writes...
Lila, there has been some research on connected laptops in classrooms. I've looked all over for this kind of info and the only stuff I've found has been from the Cornell University HCI research group(http://www.hci.cornell.edu/publications.php)
Hembrooke, H. & Gay, G. (2003). The Lecture and the Laptop: The effects of multitasking in the classroom. Journal of Computing in Higher Education, 15(1), 46-65
Gay, G., Hembrooke, H. (2002, January). Browsing behaviors in wireless learning networks. Proceedings of 35th Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS'02),9, 34-43
Links to the PDF's are in the above page.
Grace-Martin, M., Gay, G. (2001) Web browsing, mobile computing and academic performance. Special Issue on Curriculum, Instruction, Learning and the Internet. IEEE and International Forum of Educational Technology & Society,4(3),95-105, Available at http://ifets.ieee.org/periodical/vol_3_2001/grace_martin.html
Hope it's helpful.
Permalink to Comment6. Will Davies on March 16, 2004 3:11 AM writes...
I wonder if the best way to think of it is as follows: we have a gross over-supply of information in our day-to-day lives, enabling us to constantly pick and choose the bits which interest us. Traditionalists will complain that a back-channel is disruptive, but I think that there's no less of an over-supply on the conference circuit itself. There are more and more conferences, more and more speakers, but *without* there being more and more things worth saying. The quality of conferences/seminars has become really diluted, and people are inevitably going to tune out when things get dull. Back channels do provide *even more* sources of information, but partly to make up for the deterioration of the offline ones.
Permalink to Comment7. monika on March 16, 2004 9:24 AM writes...
Reminded me to an experience I made quite a while ago: Japanese, as being used living in overcrowded small places since a pretty long time, always had to cope with the problem of overwhelming and overlapping information coming as well from humans or technical devices and developed the expression 'nagara hito'. This stands for a person, who is able to do many things at one time ... literally 'meanwhile person'. Thus I think it describes a development of the 'meanwhile' ongoing, which is recognized and at the same time the vanishing focus of a so-called 'main event'.
Permalink to Comment8. Dorothy on June 7, 2004 9:30 AM writes...
HOW DO YOU USE THE BACKCHANNEL OPTION WHEN YOU ARE TOLD TO DO SO ON A PROFESSIONAL LIST SERVE?
Permalink to Comment9. Alan Levine on June 7, 2004 10:58 AM writes...
The norm of professional communication in our gatherings as the lecture to a passive audience-- stick a fork in it, it is done. We need something different.
Permalink to Comment