UK Web Focus

Innovation and best practices for the Web

A Lack of ‘Social’ and ‘Media’ at the Oxford Social Media Conference

Posted by Brian Kelly on 21 September 2009

The Oxford Social Media Conference

The Oxford Social Media Conference, held on Friday 18 September 2009 at Said Business Centre, University of Oxford, was one of the few events I’ve attended this year in which I haven’t spoken at. And it came at the end of a very busy two weeks, having facilitated workshops and given talks at the ALT-C, ALPSP and Techshare conferences and the Silos of the LAMs briefing event.

But despite not being on the programme, these days attendance at many conferences can provide opportunities for more active participation than was the case in the past, through use of Twitter and other ways in which Social Media can be used to engage with the audience (both local and remote) and facilitate informal discussions amongst the participants.

I have already described how the failure to announce a conference hashtag in advance led to participants being unable to meet up in advance (I’m sure I wasn’t the only participant to arrive the night before – and I was fortunate in spotting a colleague in my Twitter network who was also travelling to the conference). But what of use of Social Media at the conference itself?

Use of Social Media at the Event

The summary for the event began “With corporations, governments, newspapers and universities embracing blogs and Twitter feeds as key elements in their communication strategies, social media have finally come of age” and promised to “look back at the evolution of blogs and other social media to give a more nuanced understanding of the ways in which such tools have or have not made a difference at the social, political or economic level“.

Although the event did not have a technical focus, I expected it to embrace use of various aspects of Social Media as the opening statement suggested universities are doing. I was pleased, therefore, when it became clear that the panelists in the opening session were using Twitter to observe what the participants were discussing. And, following a Twitter response from Bill Thompson to a my tweet in which I linked to a screenshot of an Augmented Reality view of twitterers in the nearby locality, I took the opportunity ask (slightly tongue in cheek) whether such engagement by the panel with the audience’s ‘backchannel’ wasn’t a somewhat worrying appropriation by those in a position of power (the speakers) of what may be regarded as a democratising tool. I went on to ask whether the expected spamming of the event’s hashtag (which happened) provided an example of the inevitable commercialisation of the Social Web. We were naive in 1993 and 1994, I suggested to Bill (whom I first met at the first WWW conference in Geneva in 1994) when we described that conference as the “Woodstock of the 1990s” and predicted that what we might now refer to as ‘Web 1.0″ would bring about a radical democratisation of society. Aren’t we being equally naive to suggest that the Social Web will bring about this change?

The response was, not unexpectedly, uncertain, with the panelists pointing out that it is difficult to predict the future and that the Social Web is likely to develop in unexpected ways, and what may be regarded by some as spam (I gave an example of advertising from a taxi firm at the end of the Techshare conference) could equally be felt to be useful information by others.

For me this opening session established a lack of experts in Social Media and would be followed by more open discussions – and would avoid the lengthy responses to questions made by each member of the panel. But what happened throughout the rest of the day was a repetition of the opening panel session: talks from each of the panelists, with the occasional question or comment being made by the chairperson. I felt like I was a member of the audience at a Radio 4 programme.

So for a conference on Social Media the event was missing on the ‘social’ aspect, with little opportunity for participants to engage with the discussions. There was also little ‘media’ at the conference, with none of the speakers using any visual aids. For me meant the day was very repetitious, with little visual stimulation. It was also at odds with a comment made in the final session that “it’s all about video, video, video. There will be screens EVERYWHERE very soon“.

Now perhaps I’m being unfair. I have to admit my recent intensive spate of travelling meant that I was probably suffering from an overdose of conferences – and the enjoyable lunch provided did mean that I wasn’t paying full attention to the sessions after lunch. And an early departure meant that I missed the panel session on corporate blogging which was described asby far the most entertaining and informative of the day, mostly dealing with the politics of setting corporate blog tone and complaint/query response rate“.

Final Thoughts

I’ve described how the description for the conference suggested that “With corporations, governments, newspapers and universities embracing blogs and Twitter feeds as key elements in their communication strategies, social media have finally come of age“.

For me many of the events I now attend make use of technologies such as Twitter, blogs and video streaming as a key part of the ‘amplification’ of the event – and this amplification takes place before, during and after the event. For an event about Social Media such expectations do not seem unreasonable. It is pleasing, therefore, to note that a number of blog posts about the conference have already been published including:

The first of these links, from The Guardian, concludes: “PS: To find more detailed bits about the conference, look up the hashtag #oxsmc09 on twitter“. However as I have described previously, content posted to twitter becomes unavailable via Twitter’s search interface after about 10 days. Since media organisations such as The Guardian are likely to ensure that such evidence does not disappear, I have created a copy of the #oxsmc09 tweets which should make subsequent analysis of the discussions easier to carry out. And looking at the HTML version of the archive there is a noticeable lack of tweets by the conference organisers – unlike, say, the recent ALT C and Techshare conferences, both of which used Twitter during and after the event.

About these ads

6 Responses to “A Lack of ‘Social’ and ‘Media’ at the Oxford Social Media Conference”

  1. Great blog post Brian. I enjoyed our tweets and couldn’t agree more about the hashtag before the event. Myself and my wife were wondering around Oxford hoping we’d bump into someone going to the Convention to no avail! I would have tweeted more, but was trying to record eveything as we went along on my blog. I was actually disappointed with the corporate blogging seminar – the sole reason for it being entertaining was the impeccable Kara Swisher. But, I do come at all this from a slightly different angle.

    I am sorry we didn’t hook up.

  2. sorry – meant to say “your tweets” :-)

  3. Thanks for this in depth review. I did a quick video response. http://www.craigbellamy.net/2009/09/21/quick-response-oxford-social-media-convention-2009/

  4. […] (Follow what others had to say…) […]

  5. Maxine said

    Hello, I was one of the panellists at the conference (science publishing session). Just so you know, we were asked not to use visual aids as the idea was to promote informality and interaction with audience. Happy to respond to any feedback on the session in which I participated. Personally – I don’t think there were many scientists in attendance and some of the assertions I made were not picked up and debated by audience which I had thought might happen – I did not understand some of the questions and felt that there could have been more critical conversation in the panel. It seems from what everyone is writing that our panel suffered by being in parallel with megastar Kara ;-) I think that there is a disjunct in many people’s minds with what we are publishing in scientific journals and what is happening in the scientific “interactive webosphere” – (blogs, microblogs, preprints, various online discussion fora and data sharing, etc) would be nice to have some debate on this.

  6. Hi Maxine
    Many thanks for your comment. I attended the session on science publishing session as this is an area of growing interest to me. Indeed I gave a talk on The Role of the Social Web in Scholarly Communication at last week’s ALPSP 2009 conference. I also attended the recent Science Online Conference. At this latter event there was a Science Blogging Unconference on the Friday evening – and that informality did work, I feel, especially with the impromptu unconference sessions which allowed participants to air their views and not just the invited speakers (which included Cameron Neylon, btw).
    For me the panel sessions added extra formality to the event, rather that the opposite. (I left the event early as so missed the megastar Kara, but did pick up on the excitement by reading the tweets onthe train!)
    I do agree with you that there is a need for more debate of the roles of traditional scientific publishing and the “scientific interactive webosphere” – but the format of #oxsmc09 did not encourage that debate (I would have liked to have heard some didcussion of Caermon’s suggestion that we should get rid of 95% of peer-reviewed papers, for example).
    Once again, thanks for your response.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

 
%d bloggers like this: