ff0000 Archives : Conferences That Work

How OpenAI Has Misappropriated My Copyright: ChatGPT’s Land Grab

Monday, July 17th, 2023 by Adrian Segar

I am resigned to the fact that OpenAI‘s Large Language Model ChatGPT has scraped every blog post I’ve written here (over 750 posts in the last 13 years—around half a million words) so it can parrot my thoughts about meeting design, facilitation, and other topics. But I felt surprised, dismayed, and angry to discover that this $10 billion company had misappropriated my copyright, by digesting my copyrighted book Conferences That Work: Creating Events That People Love without any notification, discussion, or thought of compensation.

ChatGPT can be a useful tool. But does its utility justify OpenAI blatantly misappropriating copyright materials for its benefit?

I don’t think so.

ChatGPT, owned by OpenAI, has misappropriated my copyright

We have no idea how many copyrighted works besides my book have been incorporated into ChatGPT. OpenAI has not released any information about the datasets it has used. However, attorneys Shawn Helms and Jason Krieser who specialize in information technology law, write that “The vast majority of the text used to train ChatGPT was certainly subject to copyright protection.” Jenna Burrell, Director of Research for Data & Society, adds:

“The bigger concern is how ChatGPT concentrates wealth for its owners off of copyrighted work. It’s not clear if the current state of copyright law is up to the challenge of tools like it, which treat the internet as a free source of training data. Among other challenges, ChatGPT is fundamentally opaque. It is essentially impossible to track down whose copyrighted material is being drawn from in the prose it produces, suggesting every result may comprise multiple violations.”
—Jenna Burrell, ChatGPT and Copyright: The Ultimate Appropriation

I’m not alone in my concerns. Sarah Silverman and some best-selling novelists with deeper pockets than me have sued OpenAI for “ingesting their books”.

The FTC investigates OpenAI

Last week, the FTC opened an investigation into OpenAI, over whether ChatGPT has harmed consumers through its collection of data and its publication of false information on individuals. Though it seems that the investigation focuses on harm to consumers rather than the wholesale misappropriation of copyrighted information, I’m glad that the U.S. government is at least aware of ChatGPT’s impact on society in general.

This brings us to my stake in OpenAI’s land grab. You may be wondering how I know that ChatGPT has ingested a copy of my first book (and, for all I know, my other books as well). I’m not going to provide specific evidence here, though it’s along the lines of the AP News story linked above, and I’m confident that my evidence is persuasive. What I will provide, however, is already in the public domain, via a comment I made to the New York Times story about the FTC investigation into OpenAI [guest link].

I share my thoughts with the New York Times

In my comment, I shared how OpenAI misappropriated my copyright, provoking many comments and questions to which I responded.

Because the comment thread illuminates and expands on my thoughts, I have reproduced it in full below with my comments in red. I’ve also rearranged the comments so they are in thread order.

To see the thread on the New York Times website:

Open the above link;
Click on the comments button below the subhead; and
click Reader Picks, which will bring my comment to the top.

AJS commented July 13
USA
The content of at least one of my books on meeting design, copyright registered in 2010 with the United States Copyright Office, has been added to ChatGPT’s database without my permission. It was probably scraped from one of the illegal pirate internet libraries of scanned books.

Though I’m weakly flattered that ChatGPT has also incorporated every single post I’ve written on my meeting design blog (over 750 posts in the last 13 years—around half a million words), OpenAI’s flagrant misappropriation of copyrighted works from pirate databases for their own financial gain is beyond the pale.

191 Recommend 16 REPLIES

Robert commented July 13
St Paul
@AJS That’s an interesting argument, but how is ChatGPT’s use of that information substantively different than what data aggregators, including behemoths like Google, have been doing for years?

ChatGPT is just a shell overlayed onto a data set. It processes searches and responses in a natural language format, but that’s more of a superficial than substantive difference.

Are you opposed to all services that have scraped, categorized, and made your writings available, or is there something different about ChatGPT that you’re opposed to?

10 Recommend

AJS commented July 13
USA
@Robert, unlike my blog posts which are freely available for anyone with an internet connection to read, I have never made my copyrighted book available for free public reading on the internet. People have to pay to buy a legal copy.
Do you really think it’s perfectly OK for ChatGPT to illegally add a pirated scanned copy of my book to their database?

42 Recommend

SteveRR commented July 13
CA
@AJS

Copyright refers to “copying” – so the first question is “did ChatGPT copy your work?”
It is more than likely that it did copy your work.

Second, Is ChatGPT Output a Derivative Work?
Most would probably argue that it is not a derivative work

Lastly – the infamous fair use:
If ChatGPT copied your work and such copying was not for a commercial purpose and had no economic impact on the copyright owner then it is probably fair use.

Your lawyers may disagree and that is what courts are for.

3 Recommend

Austin commented July 13
Austin TX
@SteveRR Fair use is specifically for “purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, or research”. ChatGPT does neither. However, if it only uses snippets of sentences it would be ok. If it uses entire sentences or more, it could be a violation of copyright. BTW, registration is not necessary under US copyright. Copyright is automatic until the author releases it or waives it.

4 Recommended

SteveRR commented July 13
CA
@Austin

Not even the vaguest of clues where you get your “snippets of sentences” precedent.

Maybe look at fair use on youtube by way of example.

1 Recommend

AJS commented July 13
USA
@SteveRR,

First, OpenAI is not creating LLMs that slurp up everything they can get their CPUs on for the good of mankind. Rather, they are hoping to make a bazillion bucks ASAP. So I think you can make a good case that their use of my copyrighted book is for “a commercial purpose”.

Second, if anyone can get their questions they have about meeting design answered by ChatGPT—which is coughing up a version of everything in my copyrighted books on the topic—why would anyone buy a copy of my books? Under those circumstances, I think you can conclude that OpenAI’s appropriation of the contents of my copyrighted book has an “economic impact” on me.

I am not a lawyer. And I am not going to spend the rest of my life suing the giant corporation that is OpenAI—I have better things to do. But it’s pretty clear that OpenAI’s plundering of copyrighted works for their own gain “because they can” is reprehensible.

1 Recommend

Jacob commented July 13
Henderson
@AJS how do you know it was added to the system, from one of those libraries? Because if your book was widely published, so much so, that it ended up in what you call an online pirate library, is it just as likely that they used book summary sites and online posts describing the contents of your book and not the pirate library, you suspect they used?

1 Recommend

AJS commented July 13
USA
@Jacob, good question. I tested ChatGPT by asking it to summarize the most boring chapter in the book—one which has never been reviewed or mentioned. Search engines do not find any reference to the chapter; it has not been mentioned or extracted in any online review or post.

ChatGPT gave such an accurate summary of the chapter, it’s clear that the platform database includes it in its entirety.

I’ll probably never know how OpenAI got its hands on my book’s contents unless someone with deep pockets sues OpenAI and uses discovery to find out what is included in ChatGPT’s database and where they scraped it from.

5 Recommend

Jlaw commented July 13
California
@AJS on the one hand I see your point, on the other hand I can’t help wonder who really cares about a self published book but the author? I mean, no disrespect, but unless something is being said that isn’t true, I don’t see how an old book is worth depriving humanity from the latest and greatest in technology. This genie broke the bottle.

Recommend

AJS commented July 13
USA
@Jlaw, I suspect the 3,000+ people who have purchased my self-published book cared. Are you seriously saying that a self-published book has no value except to its author?

Recommend

John G commented July 13
Boston
@AJS i agree with you. It seems like a lot of people try to thread the needle for ChatGPT. However, if I upload something copyrighted to YouTube, I get a DMCA take down. That’s because YouTube and I would be making money off of the copyrighted content. The fact that the copyrighted content is obscured the way it is in ChatGPT should make no difference. ChatGPT makes no effort to even reference or cite the source material.

It could even be argued that chatGPT is a derivative work when it provides snippets “in the style of” an author.

If I make a performance from a book, I have to acquire rights to do so. ChatGPT is a performance assembled from “samples” of other peoples work.
chatGPT is blatant intellectual property theft and should be shuttered with cease and desist orders until this is resolved. There are plenty of LLM efforts that have a much cleaner pedigree than chatGPT so we would not lose much in terms of technological advancement.

2 Recommended

Observer commented July 13
NYC
@AJS This is a fascinating case, but you are blurring lines between three concepts: (1) stealing one copy of your book, (2) copyright, and (3) attribution.

On piracy: OpenAI clearly owes you the $25 (or whatever it costs) for access to your book. But that doesn’t really seem to be what is bothering you.

On copyright: OpenAI could be violating your copyright whether or not they bought your book. If they bought it legally and then reprinted exact passages, that would be a copyright violation. But the way OpenAI answers questions is arguably no different than a person who has learned the material. If I buy one of your books and answer questions someone asks me about it, that doesn’t necessarily make me a copyright violator.

It is a brand new technology that poses problems that aren’t addressed by copyright law. And, personally, I sincerely hope they are *not* found to be violating copyright law because the potential value of their service is so great. Transformational, really, in areas like medicine.

On credit: OpenAI should arguably still credit you as the source for their information. And I am certain they are working on this.

But so far, it seems like you are out $25. A bit piratical, but not a flagrant misappropriation.

2 Recommend

AJS commented July 13
USA
@Observer, but OpenAI _didn’t_ buy a copy of my book and then incorporate it into their database. And they have no intention of doing so.

Your argument is equivalent to saying someone can steal thousands of books from a bookstore, and if they get caught they can just pay for the books and everything is fine. I’m not sure our society would work so well if that was how copyright worked.

1 Recommend

John G commented July 13
Boston
@Observer if chatGPT is like a person, then you could say it is answering questions like a human. If it is like a program, then it is answering from the raw data.

It is most decidedly not like a person.

The “person” here is openai the corporation, which has used a vast array of copyrighted work to create a commercial product which makes money off of that copyrighted work. This would be no different than a company of hundreds of employees buying one copy of a book, copying it to all employees to enable them to answer questions, which violates the author’s rights.

Recommend

JN commented July 13
NY
@AJS
For the sake of argument, are you ok if OpenAI actually paid for a copy of your book before using it as training data for ChatGPT in the pursuit of knowledge?

Recommend

AJS commented July 14
USA
@JN,
As pointed out in earlier comments, OpenAI purchasing one copy of my book…
1) …didn’t and isn’t going to happen, and
2)…doesn’t give OpenAI the right to use it in ways that violate my copyright (see the argument about fair use).
Just as movie studios don’t get the right to make a movie of a book if they buy a copy—they typically pay a few percent of production costs to the copyright owner.
Just as libraries don’t have the right to buy and scan one physical book and lend it to as many patrons as they like. Libraries also negotiate payments that are far more than the retail cost of an ebook for the right to lend it to multiple patrons.
OpenAI has ignored these and other existing compensation models for copyright holders and simply taken everything they wanted for their database without discussion or a shred of conscience.

Recommend

What should OpenAI do?

OpenAI has misappropriated my copyright. I’m not happy about this, and pessimistic that this huge tech-bro-driven corporation will be brought to heel for its immoral behavior. Some authors and artists have responded by deciding to remove their content from the internet. I think this is the wrong approach. I want large corporations like OpenAI to stop misappropriating copyrighted work. OpenAI has several ethical options. The company could:

Stop including copyrighted work in their database; or
Ask creators for permission to include their content; or
Negotiate an agreement to use copyrighted work.

Any of these options would be a positive step, showing respect for the creators of copyrighted material, rather than misappropriating their work.

Tags: ChatGPT, copyright, ff0000, FTC, misappropriation, New York Times, OpenAI| Posted in Soapbox, Technology | No Comments »

ChatGPT is just a tool

Monday, July 10th, 2023 by Adrian Segar

Sorry folks, but ChatGPT is just a tool, like a hammer, pen, spell checker, or Grammarly. Like any tool, ChatGPT can be useful—and it can also be dangerous when used incorrectly.

ChatGPT is a tool called a large language model (LLM). However, marketers love to call ChatGPT and other LLMs artificial intelligence (AI) because this framing ties into our culture’s fascination with understanding who we are, how we’re able to do what we do, and whether we are unique in our abilities or not. This fascination causes us to give human names to familiar objects, like cars, and to anthropomorphize our pets and tools. Harnessing fascination is a good way to sell us stuff.

Artificial intelligence?

I’ve programmed computers for over half a century and taught college computer science from 1983 – 93. Computer researchers began to use the term artificial intelligence in the 1940s and 50s.

In 1993, JET Thomas and I conducted a seminar at Marlboro College on AI. At that time, a second AI winter held sway. Rule and frame-based systems predominated. Researchers had not implemented key components of effective neural networks, our current core AI technology. The best chess-playing programs could beat most players, but Grandmaster Gary Kasparov wouldn’t lose a chess match to a machine until 1997. During the seminar, teachers and students alike shared a fascination with the concept of AI. However, the technology of the time generated output that was completely determined by the rules built into its programs.

However, unlike the software available during our 1993 seminar, humans can’t determine how today’s LLMs come up with their responses. And these sophisticated neural networks, often called deep learning, are everywhere. We use them for speech and image recognition, and natural language processing. ChatGPT has been used to “write and debug computer programs, compose music, teleplays, fairy tales and student essays, answer test questions (sometimes, depending on the test, at a level above the average human test-taker), generate business ideas, write poetry and song lyrics, translate and summarize text, emulate a Linux system, simulate entire chat rooms, play games like tic-tac-toe, or simulate an ATM.”

Just because ChatGPT can be asked to do these things doesn’t guarantee that it creates reliable answers. The software’s creator, OpenAI, acknowledges that ChatGPT “sometimes writes plausible-sounding but incorrect or nonsensical answers”.

Here’s a simple example of the limitations and unreliability of ChatGPT.

The limitations and unreliability of ChatGPT

I asked ChatGPT to rewrite a passive voice sentence in an active voice.

Me: rewrite “Try not to get stuck.” as an active sentence.

ChatGPT: ”Make an effort to avoid getting stuck.”

Me: That’s still a passive sentence!

ChatGPT: Apologies for that oversight. Here’s an active sentence version:

“Strive to avoid getting stuck.”

Me: Still passive!

ChatGPT: I apologize for the continued oversight. Here’s an active sentence version:

“Take proactive steps to avoid getting stuck.”

Me: “getting stuck” is passive, you’ve used it each time. rewrite it.

ChatGPT: Apologies once again for the oversight. Here’s an active sentence with a revised phrase:

“Make an effort to prevent becoming trapped.”

Me: “becoming trapped” is passive too. You’ve failed.

ChatGPT: Apologies for the repeated oversight. Here’s an active sentence with an active phrase:

“Exert effort to evade getting trapped.”

Me: Grammar is not your strong point.

ChatGPT: I apologize for the errors in my previous responses. I appreciate your patience, and I’ll make sure to provide a correct and active sentence for you. Here’s an active version of the sentence:

“Strive to avoid getting stuck.”

<Sigh>.

An automated mansplaining machine

This and numerous other examples of the confident fabrications of ChatGPT have led many to characterize it—fairly in my view—as “an automated mansplaining machine“, “autocomplete on steroids“, and a “bias optimizer“. As the third reference points out, “ChatGPT cannot recontextualize or independently seek out new information that contradicts [its] built-in assumptions.”

In the above example, it would have been refreshing if ChatGPT said at some point, “Sorry, I don’t know how to do that.” Instead, it repeatedly declared it had the answer. Hence the danger of using this tool. You have no guarantee anything ChatGPT avows is actually true! How can we use something we can’t completely trust?

The answer is: Carefully!

ChatGPT and the future of work

In 2019, I wrote about my concerns about the impact of machine learning on the future of work. Recently, people have written thousands of articles about how LLMs like ChatGPT jeopardize the future work prospects of numerous professions.

Some bosses will undoubtedly believe that they can replace some employees with fewer people writing well-prompted responses from ChatGPT. Such beliefs are dangerously naive. Here are three examples of the problems that can arise:

All new technology transforms job scope over time. But only some, like the automobile, eliminate industries. ChatGPT, by making some forms of work more efficient may allow employees to be more productive, meaning a static industry may be able to employ fewer workers. But I don’t see the wholesale future elimination of lawyers, writers, software makers, and other professions that many predict.

ChatGPT is just a tool

My advice is to think of ChatGPT as just a tool. Knowing when and how to use a specific tool is important. For example, as I write this post I’m using Grammarly to check my spelling and grammar. It’s a useful tool that catches most of my errors on the fly and occasionally improves how I express myself. However, it often makes suggestions that are simply incorrect and need to be suppressed. If I relied on Grammarly 100% to proofread my work, errors would slip through. (Regardless, I’m not claiming I’m a perfect editor of my own work!)

Similarly, I find ChatGPT useful for suggesting possible blog post titles, summarizing articles, and brainstorming ways to express ideas in print. However, most of the LLM’s suggestions are not helpful to me; I always need to review them to determine if there’s anything worth using.

In conclusion, treat ChatGPT as a useful but fallible tool, rather than an oracle. And don’t worry too much about its impact on your future work prospects!

Tags: AI, artificial intelligence, ChatGPT, fascination, ff0000, future of work, grammar, LLM, tool| Posted in Technology | 2 Comments »

Moderating Online Panels — Ideas and Resources

Monday, December 21st, 2020 by Adrian Segar

Last week I immensely enjoyed participating in a two-hour Zoom brain trust on moderating online panels. So good, it should be shared with a wider audience. So here’s a treasury of good ideas and resources we uncovered.

Huge thanks to the conveners and leaders: my friend, team performance and facilitation expert Kristin Arnold, and corporate innovation leader Scott Kirsner.

As you’d expect if you know these folks, the session was very well organized and facilitated. No mean task for a vocal group of 28!

The agenda

Thank you Scott & Kristin for providing an agenda and (pretty closely) sticking to it! Here it is.

15 mins: Who’s here; what sort of moderating have you been doing?

5 mins: Scott shares some recent learnings from virtual events.

10 mins: Kristin shares some recent learnings from virtual events and a quick overview of what’s in her book.

20 mins: Breakouts (in groups of 4). What are 1-2 of your online moderating pro tips? Capture these on a shared doc (Slido).

10 mins: How did that go? Report back and bio break.

30 mins: Is panel prep different in the virtual world? Speaker recruiting? Tools and techniques for engaging the audience. Debates on burning questions (like chat or no chat, prep call or no prep call, right length.)

30 mins: Additional Q&A and discussion time (if needed).

Acknowledgments

I usually put these at the end, but because this post incorporates large, sometimes verbatim, chunks of Kristin Arnold’s excellent session notes I want to give her full co-author credit. Any errors and omissions are mine. Kristin’s name appears many times in what follows; some of the comments are hers, and some are her notes on what others said.

While I’m mentioning Kristin, the best resources I know on becoming a first-rate panel moderator are her panel-focused website and short but packed book Powerful Panels. Visit the former and buy the latter!

And now the ideas…

Some of what follows is verbatim; some is edited by me slightly. Editorial additions/comments are shown in red. When the contributor is known, I’ve added their name (with a link the first time they’re mentioned).

Pre-event calls with panelists

There are two kinds of pre-event calls, though these categories can blur, and might be covered in a single call:

Connecting with panelists. This includes getting to know them, moderator education, defining panel and panelist scope, discussing potential topics and issues
Prep/production calls. This includes technical run-throughs.

“I call it a ‘production call like you would have if you were going to be on The View or Live with Kelly and Ryan    .”
—Glenn Thayer

—Scott Kirsner‘s take

Pre-record panelists?

Restrict prerecorded segments to 5 minutes or less. —Adrian Segar

I think pre-recorded lessens the authenticity of the event    . —Kelley Kassa

Pre-record sponsor remarks, then the moderator manages the time of everyone else. —Glenn Thayer

What about pre-recorded pitchfests with live founders for Q&A? I’m running a pitchfest tonight… We pre-recorded the pitches (they’re two minutes long). —Glenn Thayer

Virtual Emcee (MC)

A virtual MC is a MUST-HAVE. —Thom Singer

Agree, but MC should be more than a security blanket. —Jan-Jaap In der Maur

For sure, I help drive the attendee experience and engagement and deliver on the networking value of the virtual event. Much more than a security blanket. —Sarah Michel

Breakouts

We always assign a breakout room “table captain” pre-hand for who will moderate the breakout room. —Raza Shaikh

Zoom now has the feature to set a room topic too. —Kristin Arnold [I think you’re referring to Zoom Rooms, not Zoom Meetings. The latter has always allowed you to rename breakout rooms to a topic, issue, or group as desired.] • However, EVERYONE in the Zoom room must have the latest version of Zoom downloaded or they won’t see the room options/topics. —Sarah Michel

At what audience size do you find that “all mics open” breaks down? —Andrew Lee Rubinger • Haven’t found a max yet. Did it up to 150    . —Jan-Jaap In der Maur

Integrate breakouts – put a panelist in each of the breakout rooms. —Kristin Arnold

On “intentionality”: I determine the story arc I want to be told in the session. It’s like a jazz performance – it’s all improv, but there are waypoints to hit. —Andrew Lee Rubinger

IME, well-designed problem-solver panels are great and audiences love them. —Adrian Segar

To help ensure that participants know what to do in breakouts when the breakout rooms are open, message them with instructions, time available, etc. Have this prewritten elsewhere, so it can be efficiently pasted into the platform. —Kristin Arnold

Preparation

Do your research before you talk to the panelists. —Kristin Arnold

Curiosity is key. —Adrian Segar

Record prep call – use those recorded snippets for social media marketing for the live event! —Kristin Arnold [Love this!]

The goal of pre-call is that they feel comfortable enough that they could mock me.     —Kristin Arnold

What questions, issues, what are you hoping to get out of this session at the beginning of the chat    ? —Kristin Arnold

Know your moderator style. —Kristin Arnold

If you want to be interesting, you have to be interested. —Daniel Seewald

General panel wisdom

Pre-empt attendee objections. For example, reduce fears about being in breakout rooms with strangers. —Demoed by Scott Kirsner during our session

Engaging the audience is not the same as involving the audience (giving them a task to do).     —Kristin Arnold

Ensure your audience knows you care…AND your panelist knows you care. Watched a Comicon panel with Charlize Theron. Initially, she wasn’t engaged. Once the moderator asked questions that really showed she did her homework, she literally leaned in. —Kristin Arnold

I love completely crowdsourcing the panel…     —Kristin Arnold [I often do this. See How a Fishbowl Sandwich Can Really Get Your Attendees Talking for more information.]

The best and most engaging moderated event I’ve seen was a workshop on “visual thinking strategies” at the Innovation Leader’s Impact conference, where the moderator of the discussion spent about 45 min having a group discussion about a Picasso painting. She just asked questions about what we saw and what we thought those symbols meant. It was genuinely like being in school — and I think that unusual dynamic made people excited. Then, after that discussion, she shifted to talking about how that could apply to business/corporate settings, and many participants said they were going to integrate what they learned in that session that day.    —Lilly Milman

Use shared documents to seek feedback and capture insights from large groups. —Anonymous [During the session we used Slido to capture insights.]

Use object voting. For example: “If you agree, hold up something in your office that’s blue. Neutral or undecided, yellow. Disagree, red.” —Kristin Arnold

Interaction with panelists

Be about something, have a position, and be honest about it. Push up against the walls. Be kind. —Kristin Arnold

Have the panelist give us a tour, give a demo, go get an object (from a trip you have been on).     —Kristin Arnold

Give panelists an object and ask them to provide a greater meaning to it.     —Kristin Arnold

Coach your panelists on how to use the camera and speak authentically    . —Kristin Arnold

    To share the questions with the panelists or not?

I almost always share prep questions with my panelists. Mostly because my panelists are tech people and not always the best speakers    . —Kelley Kassa

Provide a loose framework of where we want to go….some potential questions. Any specific questions that need some vetting… —Kristin Arnold

I always try to email topics with the caveat that we’ll ask follow-ups and make it conversational    . —Kaitlin Milliken

I like giving the first question so they will be comfortable AND the last question, which can be recorded and edited into a social media snack. —Kristin Arnold

You have to really listen to what your panelists are saying…and make decisions on what to probe further    . —Kristin Arnold

Ask panelists to bring one question to the panel to ask each other. —Kristin Arnold

    Design for the audience & connections

There is NO panel without an audience. —Sarah Michel

In the midst of this global pandemic, people are attending virtual events seeking meaningful connections. We must design panels for that    . —Sarah Michel

The moderator is a champion for the audience. Everything has to flow from the audience. How does this make them better people? —Kristin Arnold

IME, audiences love well-designed problem solver panels. —Adrian Segar

Interview the audience before it starts    . —Kristin Arnold

Content is not king…it’s context and connections    . —Kristin Arnold

Drive to action…run a poll – who do you want to follow up with? —Anonymous

    Platform

Get to know the functionality of platforms. Offer alternatives. —Kristin Arnold

Use an online poll to start the session. —Anonymous

Leverage chat. It’s gold. Be on chat early and ask the audience to answer a question. Keep the chat open afterward. I have a love/hate relationship with chat as neuroscience says that we aren’t focused on the conversation    . —Anonymous

Casual or Formal?

There is a whole business of a production studio in a box that gets sent to a panelist… —Anonymous

Some corporations don’t want casual they want big production. —Anonymous

I’ve gotten the box sent to me for an event. Lots of rehearsals too. —Anonymous

I ask my clients what backgrounds/level of production they want… —Anonymous

More hybrid meetings in future

Small in-person studio audience and a much larger virtual one. Curate the studio audience… —Sarah Michel

More ideas from breakouts via Slido

Love asking panel members (or speakers) to change their backgrounds when you want to shift the energy or when you go to live Q&A, etc.

Set up a shared “group notes” document where people can contribute their notes from the panel. You can even give a prize to the best note-taker at the event.

Whatever goes wrong with A/V last time won’t happen next time…relax over technical glitches. They are bound to happen.

Conversations don’t have scripts. There’s a road map of where I want to go but need to go with the conversations.

When clients are technologically not especially comfortable, ask for ONE thing to do vs. the world of possibilities    .

Don’t tell your clients everything you will be doing…as they will defend/say no.

Sometimes, a heads-up might be appropriate so they aren’t thrown off    .

Ask panelists to stay for networking time between sessions. That way, the audience can meet them and have one on one conversations.

Have panelists ask each other questions – they usually have great questions for each other.

Fireside chats…work with the speaker to cut into small pieces    .

Every 6-10 minutes switch gears and do something different    .

If an online gathering has less than 20 people, consider starting with introductions. The moderator calls on each name: 15 seconds maximum.

If you’re not a subject matter expert, ask panelists in prep calls: What matters most right now?

What would you tell me about in an elevator?

Put a pillow in your lap if you have a little sound echo in your room    .

When there’s content that is very technical, ask questions like “Please explain X as if you’re talking to someone completely unfamiliar with the topic”. [Me: I often open by stating that I know less about the panel topic than anyone else in the room—but I do know how to moderate panels!]

Be punchy, and concise. Less is more. Provide a digestible premise that people are interested in.

Pre-record segments – edit them down into more focused conversations. Or cut at key points and stop to interact    .

Use panelists as priming for large group discussions. [See my book “Event Crowdsourcing” and these articles “How a fishbowl sandwich can really get your attendees talking” and “The best way to hold a discussion online“]

To run fishbowl discussions on Zoom, have everyone turn their camera off until they have something to say. When they turn their camera on, they float to the top of Gallery View     That makes it easy for the moderator (whose camera is always on) to see who wants to talk.     [See third link above.]

Use Zoom breakout rooms for “hallway” conversations after a panel. Put the panelists into one of those rooms after the panel is over so people can “meet” them. [Also consider using online social platforms for breaks and socials.]

Give frequent, small assignments: e.g. write down your biggest challenge. Use that as a start to the conversation.

When you do an A/V check, make sure panelists use the same equipment and time of day!

On Zoom train and teach all people to use the blue hand raise button instead of physically raising the hand    . [Depends on group size; I prefer human hand raising if the group is viewable on one screen in Gallery view.]

Ask everyone to keep their camera on as a way of showing respect and being present.

Have a 2nd device ready…like your phone…in case of wifi or Zoom problems.

Pre-record sponsor segments.

Put into chat what you want attendees to do!

Ask people to talk about one favorite object from a trip.

Practice as much as you can and prep for props/interactive elements.

Using visuals and doing things like physically leaning in can engage people and create intimacy.

Think about the audience first.

Resources

How to touch people when your event is online —Jan-Jaap In der Maur

Love Mural, having a quick and easy task to begin with to get everyone up to speed helps. —Caitlin Harper [I prefer Miro.]

Use a visual notetaker [aka graphic recorder]! —Caitlin Harper

If you wanna hear about Kristin’s brilliance with the CAPS conference last week…. we interviewed her today on Webinar Talk Show about all their ideas and how they pulled it off. 35-minute interview. Watch it…cuz she had soooo many good points about being engaging. —Thom Singer

Slido for polling and capturing participant ideas/questions/etc.

If you’d like to see what a business partner and I started for people like me who want to PRESENT rather than PRODUCE, visit livestream-denver.com. This is a work in progress and not a sales pitch as we work almost exclusively with clients in the Denver area. —Mark Sanborn

How a fishbowl sandwich can really get your attendees talking —Adrian Segar

The best way to hold a discussion online —Adrian Segar

Anything you want to add, correct, or disagree with in this bounty of advice on moderating online panels? Share in the comments below!

Tags: choosing panelists, conference panels, ff0000, ffff00, moderation, moderators, online meeting, online panel, panel design, panel formats, panel moderator, panels, powerful panels| Posted in Event design, facilitation | No Comments »

How eventprofs are feeling during COVID-19

Monday, April 13th, 2020 by Adrian Segar

How are eventprofs feeling during COVID-19? Over the past few weeks amid the novel coronavirus pandemic, I’ve listened to hundreds of people share their feelings at online meetings I’ve led and joined. Though everyone’s response has been unique, three distinct sets of emotions stand out. Here they are, from the perspective of the many meeting professionals I’ve heard.

Anxious

I estimate that about 85% of the event professionals I listened to shared feelings of fear, compared to about 65% of the general population. The most common description I heard was anxiety/anxious. But strong expressions like “scared”, “terrified”, and “very worried” were more common than I expected (~5-10%).

This is hardly surprising. Every event professional who spoke had lost essentially all their short-term work and event-related income. In some cases, they were attempting under extreme time and resource pressures to move meetings online. The meeting industry has been struggling for years to understand and develop online meeting models that provide traditional face-to-face meetings’ desired outcomes and are both technically and financially feasible. To have to pivot to such modalities overnight — assuming they are even feasible for the specific meetings in question — is having a huge impact on every aspect of the meeting industry.

When your present circumstances and potential future dramatically change, feeling fear is a normal and healthy response. And fear of anticipated upsetting change leads to the next set of emotions…

Unsettled

About half of event professionals, and slightly less of everyone I heard, shared feeling unsettled. “Unsettled” is a mixture of fear and sadness we may feel when we experience the world as less predictable and our sense of control or comfort with our circumstances reduced.

Feeling unsettled is a natural response to perceived chaos, as illuminated by Virginia Satir‘s change model.

Above is a diagram of Satir’s model of change. An old status quo (the event industry before COVID-19) is disrupted by a foreign element (the COVID-19 pandemic). Then we begin to live in chaos and do not know what will happen next. This provokes our feeling unsettled. Such chaos continues for an unknown period. Eventually, a transforming idea or event (in this case, for example, perhaps the development of a vaccine) allows a period of transition away from chaos towards a new status quo (hopefully, a post-pandemic world).

Hopeful

I was surprised that about half of the general populace mentioned feeling some form of hopefulness about their current situation. Event professionals were far less likely to share feeling this way. This discrepancy is probably because some of the non-event industry people were retirees, and others have escaped significant professional impact.

It makes sense to me that meeting professionals aren’t feeling especially hopeful right now. If/when the chaos and destruction of the COVID-19 pandemic subsides, we don’t know how much delay there will be before face-to-face events are scheduled and run. And we also don’t know how our industry will change for good, and what our new roles in it will be.

My experience

These days, I feel all the above emotions (though not all at the same time 😀). Clients have canceled all my short-term design and facilitation work. I love to facilitate connection and feel sad about not having face-to-face interactions with clients and meeting participants. I am anxious about the health of my family and myself, and unsettled about an unknown future for my personal and professional life.

Yet I am also hopeful.

I have reached out to connect in real-time online. Although I have created and facilitated hundreds of online meetings over the last ten years (from the days when video chat was a buggy and bandwidth-limited experience) I am continuing to learn more about facilitating connection around relevant content online. And I’m thinking about how online meetings can be significantly improved, using technology to create better implementations of the many in-person participation techniques I’ve developed and championed for decades.

What’s your experience of how eventprofs are feeling during COVID-19?

Please share your own experience and what you’ve heard from others in the comments below!

Tags: anxious, change, change model, chaos, coronavirus, COVID-19, eventprofs, feelings, ff0000, hopeful, Satir, status quo, unsettled, Virginia Satir| Posted in Event professionals, life lessons, NoRepost | No Comments »

Five Reasons to Change Conferences

Monday, December 24th, 2018 by Adrian Segar

Here’s my article “Five Reasons to Change Conferences“, published in the December 2018, NSA Speaker magazine.

OUTSIDE IN

Five Reasons to Change Conferences

Peer sessions provide greater connection around content

The most important reason people go to conferences is to usefully connect with others around relevant content. But our conference programs still focus on lectures, where a few experts broadcast their knowledge to passive listeners. During lectures there’s no connection between audience members and no connection around lecture content. Here are five reasons why.

Lectures are a terrible way to learn. We’ve known for over a hundred years that lectures are a terrible way to learn. Lectures are a seductive meeting format because they provide an efficient way of sharing information. However, lectures are perhaps the least effective way of learning anything.

Why? Over time, we rapidly forget almost everything we’ve been told. But when we engage with content, we remember more of it, remember it more accurately, and remember it longer. Every measure of learning increases drastically when attendees actively participate in sessions.

Professionals learn predominantly socially, not in the classroom. Until about twenty years ago, professionals learned most of what they needed to know to do their jobs in the classroom. Today only about 10% of what we need to know involves formal classroom teaching. The other 90% is informal — a combination of self-directed learning, experiential learning on the job or learning at conferences with our peers.

Unfortunately, we persist in making the bulk of “education” at meetings consist of formal presentations by a few experts.

Today, everyone has expertise and experience to share. Everyone who has worked in a profession for a while is an expert resource in some capacity. Instead of limiting content to a few “experts,” peer conferences uncover and tap the thousands of years of expertise and experience in the room. As author David Weinberger puts it: “The smartest person in the room is the room.”

Most sessions don’t address actual attendee wants and needs. Conferences need to provide just-in-time learning, and you can’t predict most of those topics in advance. My research has found that 50 – 90% of all prescheduled conference sessions are not what attendees actually want and need. In contrast, just about all peer conference sessions, chosen and run by participants during the event, are rated highly because they provide what participants want.

At traditional conferences, connection is relegated to the breaks, meals, and socials. We so often hear “The best part of that conference was the hallway conversations.” It doesn’t have to be that way! Peer conferences provide conference sessions where participants connect around relevant, timely content. How can you adapt what you do to be a catalyst for conference change?

Adrian Segar has designed and facilitated meetings for 37 years. He writes regularly about event design, has authored two classic meeting design books, and is an industry advocate for participation-rich, participant-led meetings. Learn about his next book: The Little Book of Event Crowdsourcing Secrets.

Tags: 2018, connection, December, ff0000, just-in-time, Learning, lectures, NSA Speaker magazine, peer conferences, social learning| Posted in Event design | No Comments »

Nine conference mythodologies

Monday, May 14th, 2018 by Adrian Segar

Long ago, consultant Tom Gilb coined the term “mythodology” to describe erroneous but commonly held beliefs about how something should be done. Here are nine conference mythodologies.

Mythodology: We know what our attendees want to learn about

Reality: No, you don’t. At least half the sessions programmed at traditional conferences are not what attendees want.

Mythodology: Event socials are a good way to meet people

Reality: People tend to stay with people they already know at event socials. Participant-driven and participation-rich events provide far more opportunities to meet people you actually want to meet.

Mythodology: A “conference curator” can improve the quality of your conference content

Reality: Sadly, conference curators don’t exist. However, discovering the content wants and needs of participants at the event and satisfying them with the collective resources in the room is routinely possible and significantly improves the quality of your conference content.

Mythodology: Learning occurs through events

Reality: Learning is a continual process; formal events only contribute a small percentage to the whole.

Mythodology: Conference programs should be stuffed full of sessions so there’s something of interest for everyone

Reality: Downtime is essential for effective learning and connection, so providing conference white space is essential. (Trick: Stuff your program if you must, but give attendees explicit permission to take their own downtime when they need it.)

Mythodology: Adding novelty to a meeting makes it better

Reality: Novelty is a one-time trick. Next time it’s old. But making your meeting better lasts. Go for better, not just different.

Mythodology: Big conferences are better conferences

Reality: Better for the owners perhaps (if the meeting is making a profit) but not better for participants. Today’s most successful conferences are micro conferences. (And, by the way, most conferences are small conferences.)

Mythodology: We know what attendees like, don’t like, and value about our meeting

Reality: If you’re using smile sheets or online surveys, you’re learning nothing about the long-term value of your meeting. This is the meeting industry’s biggest dirty secret. Use long-term evaluation techniques [1] [2] instead.

Mythodology: We can contract a venue for our meeting before we design it

Reality: Sounds silly when put like that, but it happens all the time. Designing your meeting and then choosing a venue that can showcase your design will improve your meeting experience (and can save you big bucks!)

I bet you can think of more than these nine conference mythodologies. Share them in the comments!

Image attribution: Flickr user dunechaser

Tags: conference curator, design, evaluations, ff0000, Learning, meeting size, Mythodology, Novelty, socials, Tom Gilb, venue contracting, white space| Posted in Event design | 2 Comments »

Lessons for #eventprofs from an improv and mindfulness workshop — Part 1

Monday, June 27th, 2016 by Adrian Segar

Here are some improv and mindfulness lessons from a five-day improv and mindfulness workshop I attended in Maine in 2016.

You had to be there. In this case, “there” was a wonderful five-day improv and mindfulness workshop Mindful Play, Playful Mind, held June 8-13 2016, at Mere Point on the beautiful Maine coast. In this two-part article, I’ll share a little of my experience and takeaways, followed by their relevance to event design (red).

How I got there

Many people think of improv as a form of entertainment. I am fascinated by my experiences of improv as a tool for better living. As Patricia Ryan Madson, a teacher of both workshop leaders, says: “Life is an improvisation.” In addition, I’ve been working for over 40 years (with erratic focus and success) on practicing mindfulness in my daily life. So, when I heard in 2015 that Ted DesMaisons and Lisa Rowland, with whom I’d spent three days at a 2012 beginner’s improv workshop in San Francisco, were offering a workshop on improv and mindfulness, I badly wanted to go. Although that opportunity had to be passed up—PCMA made me an offer I couldn’t refuse: facilitating the 2015 PCMA Education Conference—I made it to the 2016 workshop.

I’m glad I did.

Where I came from

I became interested in improv after short experiences in various workshops during the last 15 years. After a three-day introductory workshop at BATS, I attended two four-day Applied Improvisation Network World Conferences (San Francisco 2012 and Montreal 2015). In Lessons From Improv and other posts I’ve shared how improv shines a powerful light on core practices that improve events. Saying Yes to offers can allow amazing things to happen at conferences, Being Average improves our creativity by focusing on the possibilities inside the box, and Waking Up to the Gifts makes the importance of public and specific appreciations at events obvious.

Looking back, I’ve only one post about mindfulness. Not because it’s less important, but because I find mindfulness hard to write about.

The content and process of Mindful Play, Playful Mind was so rich that I’ll cover only a fraction of what one might learn from participating: the fraction that especially resonated for me at this time in my life. Here goes…

Practice

One of the key gifts I received from the workshop was the gift of practice of improv and mindfulness.

The principles of improv, though easy to grasp, require practice to master. I’m far from mastery. The first time I worked with a fellow participant in a simple game, Ted and Lisa gently pointed out that I blocked her first two offers. (Essentially, I said “no, not that” to what she had suggested about my character and motivations). I noticed that I sometimes say “no” to perfectly appropriate ideas. Improv doesn’t mean accepting anything anyone says to you; rather it is a way to expand a world of possibilities that one might otherwise reject. Practicing saying “yes” over our five days together helped me be more open to saying it in my life.

Each morning, Ted led us through an hour of movement and meditation. During the last ten years, I have had a rather, well let’s just say, sporadic mindfulness practice. On the fourth morning of the workshop, I was so aware of the benefits of daily practice, I determined to start each day henceforth with yoga and meditation. This decision was a surprise to me. It may well turn out to be the most significant change in my life from this workshop. We’ll see.

After we have grasped the basics of event design, mindful practice is how we improve. We become better at noticing what happens and learning from it, more focused on the present, and less distracted by our ego. Improv practice increases our creativity in dealing with the unexpected (turning broken eggs into omelets), makes accepting offers (of assistance and opportunities) easier, and helps us to work better with and support collaborators.

Being appreciated

It was a surprise to me to find during the workshop that I still short-change appreciations from others. I was taught at an early age to feel embarrassed by compliments, applause, or thanks. Though I’m better able to accept these things nowadays, I still feel a certain reticence at accepting these positive affirmations.

Providing private and public appreciations to those who make our events possible is incredibly important. Accepting such appreciations as offers of love, connection, and support is equally important.

improv and mindfulness lessons: Workshop participants Ellen, Nancy, Nahin, Ellena, Wendy, Everlyn, and Adrian with Ted DesMaisons (beard) and Lisa Rowland (scarf) — Workshop participants with Ted DesMaisons (beard) and Lisa Rowland (scarf)

Creating connection with others

Although I had previously spent time with workshop leaders Ted & Lisa, I had never met my fellow participants before. All nine of us spent five days living, playing, and working together. We stayed in an old family home overlooking a stunning Maine estuary and ate meals together. One afternoon we hiked together over Morse Mountain to Seawall Beach. Our workshop was held either outside or in the Mere Point Yacht Club next door 😀.

By the end of our time together, I got to know Ellen, Nancy, Nahin, Ellena, Wendy, and Everlyn better in some ways than our Vermont neighbors (and friends), with whom we’ve shared a driveway for over thirty years. The improv and mindfulness exercises we experienced together allowed us to help each other learn and grow.

Well-designed events can change peoples’ lives through the connections we make during them and the learning and changes that result. What an amazing responsibility and opportunity we have!

There are more improv and mindfulness lessons in Part 2!

Tags: ff0000, improv, Lisa Rowland, Mindful Play, mindfulness, play, Playful Mind, Ted DesMaisons, workshop| Posted in Event design | 1 Comment »

Lessons from Anguilla: Learning from what doesn’t change

Monday, February 29th, 2016 by Adrian Segar

Can we learn from what doesn’t change?

Yes. Daddy’s First Son’s dogs made me do it.

Every day of my annual visits to Anguilla, right after waking up, I’ve taken a 25-minute walk (red line below).

I’ve written about the importance of my morning route.

It’s a feast of the senses. Warm air on my skin. The sweet smell of almond croissants—alarming numbers of calories beckoning, reluctantly resisted—waft from the French bakery. Bass notes thud from several houses, random patterns until I am close enough to hear the melody. I pass trailers cradling gleaming powerboats: Pure Pleasure, Wet Dreamz, Drippin’ Wet, and Royal Seaduction (notice a theme here?) The gentle return uphill gradient calls for a quick dip in our pool. As I cool down I hear the clamor of bananaquits on the veranda railing gobbling up the raw sugar we’ve set out for them.
Connection: A morning walk in Anguilla

But one day last year, with no advance warning, several of Daddy’s First Son’s dogs leaped over the low wall around Son’s house, snarling loudly, and one of them bit my leg (nothing too serious). For the remainder of the stay, I carried a rolled-up newspaper, which I was forced to use, luckily successfully, on a second occasion.

Time to change

On returning this year, I didn’t want to carry a dog-repelling device. Or worry each time passing Son’s house whether today would be the occasion of Attack Number Three.

I reluctantly changed my route.

With no alternative loop available, I chose a destination itinerary: to the tip of Island Harbour’s wharf and back.

No more returning home via a pleasant loop, no more glimpses of Royal Seaduction—and, thankfully, no more fierce, territorial, unrestricted dogs.

The new route is longer, 40 minutes. It includes more main road, where occasionally one faces reckless Anguillian drivers speeding a little faster than pedestrians on the narrow verges like.

But there are compensating vistas: for example, the poignant Eduarlin Barber Shop:

The Anguilla Sea Salt Company/Miniature Golf/Ice Cream Parlor Anchor Complex (how’s that for synergy?!):

Sunny Time Grocery:

And, of course, the beauty of Island Harbour itself.

After a week of these changed morning excursions, I am still discovering new aspects of my path. This is sure to continue.

But what’s most important is my experience and realization of what has not changed.

Learn from what doesn’t change

The Anguillians I meet each day, whether walking past or whizzing by in their cars are still the warm, connecting people they’ve always been.

Almost everyone I see on my walk responds in some way. On foot, the standard greeting is mornin’. The people who drive past me raise a hand in greeting, and sometimes hoot the horn. These are not, usually, people I know or have ever met before, and I may never meet them again. And yet, there’s invariably a moment of connection.

Every day, unexpected responses. The speedy truck driver who takes both hands off the wheel, palms facing me to say hi as I walk towards him, the hedge on my right leaving me no place to go if his steering is not true. The beautiful woman who shoots me a dazzling smile as she leaves her driveway for work. Two locals walking in the same direction who, as I pass with a mornin’, say fast walkin’ admiringly to my back. Nuanced respectful nods from respectable Anguillan lady drivers. The grandmother who pivots from conversation to pipe a melodious good morning. Her granddaughter in cream blouse and green skirt uniform, waiting for her ride to school, murmurs hello as I pass. A businesswoman gripping the top of her steering wheel, fingers flying up like rabbit ears when I wave. The minister, waiting for a ride to preach to his church who lifts his hand and our eyes connect. Then I’m past, turning the corner, moving towards the next meeting.

Such simple moments of connection. So little to give, so much received. Growing warmth. A wonderful way to start any morning.

Sometimes, the lessons we learn from what doesn’t change are the most important lessons of all.

Tags: Anguilla, connection, facilitating change, ff0000, Learning| Posted in Facilitating Change, Lessons from Anguilla | 1 Comment »

Tortured by Nights of the Round Table

Monday, November 5th, 2012 by Adrian Segar

Do you use round tables (aka “rounds”) at your events? Then it’s time to talk about the Nights of the Round Table. Read on, prithee!

A medieval fantasy

Sadly, it’s not clear that King Arthur’s famous Round Table ever actually existed, let alone King Arthur himself. But let’s succumb to a romantic fantasy for a moment (or longer if you like) and assume that there really was a Round Table that looked like the picture above, and you were one of these fabulously clothed dudes hanging out on blocks that were de rigueur for luxurious seating in the 5th century.

How would that work for you?

For me, the “chair” would get to be annoying after a while, but what would really exasperate me would be that I’d only be able to talk to the Knights immediately to my left and right.

All those fascinating Knights of the Round Table. What wonderful stories they could tell! But I’m stuck with talking to just two of them for the whole banquet. Bummer!

Using rounds at events

Back to the present day.

What are round tables about and why do we use them? Well, a round table has no head, implying equal status to everyone who sits there. This is an ideal table shape for pick-your-own seating—no jockeying for the high-status “head” of the table—and everyone faces everybody else as much as possible, given the laws of geometry. As a result, round tables are optimum for small group work when tables are needed (see below).

The larger the table, the more people you can seat around it, but the farther people are from each other. The right table diameter depends on the number of people in each group. Unfortunately, round tables that are too large are often used at events. In practice, once you’re seated at a table that’s more than 54″ in diameter you need the hearing of a teenager, advanced lip-reading ability, or a working Cone of Silence to hear everything that’s going on.

Tables that are larger than needed will reduce the intimacy of the group, so choose the optimum group size and arrange for the correct size rounds in advance, as shown in this table (green is good):

The optimum number of seats versus table size

Table diameter Optimum number of seats

36” 4

48” 6

54” 7-8

60” 8

66” 9

72” 10

It’s hard to make a strong case for large round tables. In my experience, group work that requires a table is less effective with group sizes larger than 8. And, using the industry standard formula, a 72″ table requires at least 12.1 sq. ft. of room space per person; a 48″ table requires 13.5 sq. ft. If you’re cramming people in so tightly that this difference is important, perhaps you’d enjoy a ride on the Tokyo subway.

As a 70+-year-old starting-to-go-deaf guy, I find that 60″ tables provide a sub-par conversational experience. I strongly recommend not using group discussion tables larger than 60” for multiple table room sets, because they make it difficult for many people to hear those sitting across the table, even if the room has exceptional sound-deadening acoustics and the tables are spaced more widely apart than normal.

Do you even need tables at all?

Seating people at round tables makes sense if they’re going to:

Eat formally in the same room and there isn’t the time and money to change the room set.
Participate in certain kinds of group processes like The Solution Room or World Café where the table—covered with paper—is used as a place to document issues and ideas.

That’s it! Under any other circumstances get rid of the tables! They place an unneeded barrier between attendees, reducing intimacy and connection. And once they’re gone, it’s easy for session participants to quickly reconfigure the room set themselves to switch between, say, curved theatre seating, small group circles, and fishbowl layouts.

This discussion is tabled

Meeting planners; don’t make people suffer through another 1001 tortured Nights of the Round Table. Keep your round tables small, or eliminate them and your attendees will benefit.

Now, back to my medieval fantasy. Perhaps I can introduce a partner change between courses…

Tags: ff0000, round tables, rounds, seating| Posted in Event design | 3 Comments »

Using Google Hangouts On Air to stream a keynote

Monday, July 2nd, 2012 by Adrian Segar

On May 7, 2012 Google opened up Google Hangouts On Air (HOA)—a free service for broadcasting and recording live video with up to 10 participants—to all Google+ users. Six weeks later, the night before edACCESS 2012 started at the Peddie School in New Jersey, I decided to try using Google Hangouts On Air to stream and then archive the conference keynote. A couple of edACCESS old-timers who couldn’t attend in person this year had asked me if there was any way we could stream any of the “public” conference sessions. I had nothing to lose by trying out this new technology.

Here’s what I did, what I learned, and how things turned out.

Google Hangouts On Air preparation
First I created an empty Google+ Circle and went through the process of creating a test Hangout On Air. This allowed me to get familiar with the process and check in advance for any potential problems. I was able to successfully view myself streaming, and see how the stream turned into a YouTube video once I ended the Hangout. This gave me the confidence to announce through social media channels that the stream would be available. (Though I neglected to figure out how to provide a link to the stream in advance).

Peddie’s charming and efficient Director of Academic Technology provided a laptop with a decent external webcam and we circled each other on Google+ so I could add her computer to the hangout on the morning of the keynote. (Important note: you cannot invite people to a hangout unless they’ve added you to one of their circles first.) I decided to use her computer to stream video and audio of the keynote speaker, and my trusty 17″ MacBook Pro with built in webcam to setup the hangout and publicize and monitor the feed.

To broadcast Hangouts on Air you must have a linked and verified YouTube account associated with your Google login. This linked account will be where the broadcast stream, and later the video recording will appear. You only need to set up this linkage once, but I strongly suggest you do so (and test it) before your first HOA. Verification is apparently necessary if you want to save a hangout that lasts longer than fifteen minutes!

Showtime!
Ten minutes before the keynote was due to begin I started a hangout in the usual way by clicking on the START A HANGOUT button on the Google+ hangouts tab. Then I added Emily to the invitee list, named the hangout, checked the option “Enable Hangouts On Air” (and agreed to the warning dialog), and clicked the Hang out button. This led to a normal-looking hangout window, with the addition of an Embed link and a Start Broadcast button at the top right.

Once Emily accepted my invitation, we were nearly good to go. The big picture feed in a hangout is switched to the webcam with the loudest audio. I wanted to avoid having the stream switch away from Emily’s webcam so I muted the microphone on my computer by hovering over my small video window at the bottom and clicking on the microphone icon.

But I still needed to share a link to the stream so that anyone could watch. Clicking the Embed link on the Hangout page I obtained the embed code for the stream and quickly created a blog post with the embedded keynote stream. This embedded a YouTube player onto the page. Visitors could watch the live Hangout On Air directly from the page, as well as on Google+ and my YouTube channel. (Note: once the broadcast is over, this link points automatically to the resulting YouTube video post.) I checked the blog page to ensure the video looked OK before we went live. Then I tweeted the page link to the blog page.

[Later I discovered that when the hangout is starting, if you right-click on the timestamp of the Google+ post that announces the hangout you will also get a link to the stream.]

We were ready!

By this time the speaker was being introduced. I clicked the Start Broadcast button and we went live.

While hosting the hangout on my computer I could watch the broadcast stream, delayed by 5-10 seconds, in another browser window. Pretty cool! I also noticed that an updating count of stream viewers was displayed on the hangout page. Also cool!

After a few minutes I realized that seeing my face at the bottom of the hangout was distracting, so I turned off my camera.

Then I received a tweet from my friend Ruud Janssen in Switzerland(!) who was watching. He asked if I could use my camera to show the slides as the main video, moving the video of the speaker to a small window at the bottom of the screen. This made sense, so I turned my laptop round, pointed it at the slide screen, and clicked on its window to make the slides the main video for the stream. This worked well. (I should have thought of this earlier. Next time I will explore using a tool like CamTwist to pipe presenter slides directly into a hangout feed.)

Unlike a regular hangout, where any participant can override the camera switching that Google normally does, the main window for a Hangout On Air is either determined automatically from the webcam with the loudest audio or by the person streaming the hangout. So I became the camera operator. When the speaker asked for and answered questions, I chose Emily’s webcam. When he began speaking again, I returned to the slides as the main video.

We had no audience microphone, so I asked the speaker to repeat audience questions. That allowed stream followers to hear questions and they’d be included on the final YouTube video. Next time we could add a small netbook webcam to the hangout and have a volunteer run it round as a mike (and video) for audience questions.

When the keynote was over I simply clicked End broadcast. After about ten minutes, a recorded video of the 105 minute hangout automatically posted to my YouTube channel as well as the post on my Google+ Page, and the embed post on my blog. At this point I was able to edit the video information on YouTube. Now it appeared in my YouTube Channel with the same title I had given the hangout. Apparently you can use YouTube’s tools to edit the video itself, but I didn’t do this.

Conclusion
Broadcasting this impromptu stream only required a small amount of preparation. Upon completion the stream automatically turns into a standard permanent YouTube video. The ease and quality of the result pleases me. Sure, it’s not a professional broadcast and recording. But for the cost (free!) and minimal effort required, Google Hangouts On Air provides an attractive solution for streaming and archiving events that will fill many needs. I recommend you try out this approach for a low-profile event.

Tips and resources for Google Hangouts On Air
Here are a couple of useful tips from a longer list of Hangouts On Air tips by Fraser Cain:

– You can join a Hangout twice from two different devices. This will let you put up screenshots, videos, etc in another pane.
– Create an intro screen graphic beforehand that introduces the Hangout. Run this in your hangout for the first 5 minutes before you start.

And here are two useful resource guides for learning more about Hangouts On Air:
Hangouts On Air Technical Guide <pdf>
Google+ support page for Hangouts On Air

Got any questions? I’ll try to answer them if I can. Have you run a Google Hangout On Air for an event? Share your experience here!

Tags: cameras, ff0000, Google, hangout, keynote, multiple, presentation, streaming| Posted in Event design, NoRepost, Presentations | 26 Comments »

Table diameter	Optimum number of seats
36”	4
48”	6
54”	7-8
60”	8
66”	9
72”	10