Should Conferences Ban Blogging?

Photo by penmachine

Dave Armano is watching an interesting thread started by Greg Verdino. Apparently blogging was banned at this week's Nielsen BuzzMetric client-only conference on consumer generated media.

Greg says: "So how can you host an event about consumer generated media and not let your consumers, um, generate media?"

Now contrast this with Forrester's Consumer Forum. Forrester had a group blog up and running written by attendees.

I see both sides of this issue, but I agree wholeheartedly with Greg. On the one hand if you let bloggers write about a customer conference in detail, there's little need for anyone to pay to attend. However, on the flip side, if you allowing blogging and people take you up on the offer, it's highly likely that you will generate excitement that boosts customer attendance next year. This is especially true if the conference, um, is in part about blogging.

It is definitely far better to allow blogging at an event than to ban it. Look at Gnomedex. Attendance has skyrocketed at this event the last few years. One key reason was that it was heavily blogged.

Comments

[Joseph Thornley]

"if you allow blogging and people take you up on the offer, it's highly likely that you will generate excitement that boosts customer attendance next year."
Steve, I read about the Blog Business Summit last year in blog posts. Reading about who was there and the quality of the discussion made me want to attend.
So this year, I flew across the continent, paid for a hotel for three nights and paid the registration - so that I could participate firsthand in Blog Business Summit 2006.
And I blogged extensively and in detail about it. And althought I crammed a great deal into my posts, there is no substitute for being there.
I believe that by blogging a conference, I will encourage others to attend next year.

[ma]

not allowing people to blog is a silly idea. even if bloggers write detailed posts, they'll never be as insightful as being there. in many cases, the real value of conferences aren't the sessions or keynotes but talking with other attendees. you could easily argue blogs are, in fact, good marketing vehicles for conferences. the more interesting the posts, the more attractive they will arguably be for potential attendees.

[Michael Pate]

Even Librarians are busy blogging at our conferences these days. Apparently, we are more enlightened than I thought.

[Pascal Van Hecke]

It _is_ however annoying for speakers to have a room full of people staring at their screens and trying to outsmart the speaker in their blogposts... instead of concentrating on the presentation.
That doesn't stimulate the interaction, exchange and discussion a conference is supposed to be meant for.

[David Armano]

Pascal,

I don't think this is about live blogging as much as it is about blogging your experience at the event in general.

The Forrester move was smart. They invited independent bloggers to capture their thoughts as well as post photos, and now that it's over, the blog pretty much acts as a promotional tool for the next one. Plus it gets picked up on the search engines etc. (they also had wi-fi and encouraged participants to blog)

For me personally, when I catch up on a few blog posts about a conference—if the coverage is positive it usually makes me wish I was there in person.

[Deepak]

I don't quite agree that if a conference is heavily blogged, I might choose not to attend. If the reason for being at the conference is participation, no amount of blog coverage is going to keep me away. If the reason for attendance was to find out any trends and just stay in the background, then perhaps I might choose to stay away.

Where liveblogging is concerned, one approach could be to have a certain section of the conference room dedicated to bloggers. That way, they won't be scattered across the room, potentially distracting the speaker. While I have never liveblogged, I tend to typing in notes anyway, something not too uncommon.

[Zoli Erdos]

On a sidenote, this photo could be a paid Apple ad :-)

[Graham Jones]

Oh dear. Another conference organiser who doesn't understand why people attend conferences. Let's get this straight. People do not attend conferences for the content. I'll repeat that, people do not attend conferences for the content. They say they do and they justify their attendance on content grounds, but repeated research shows that people attend because of the other people who will be there. It's a social thing. So, blogging the content will have no significant impact on attendance. Plus stopping people blogging the content is the same as asking people not to talk about the meeting. Conference organisers who want to ban bloggers will be the ones with lower attendance as a result of such a policy.

[Ivan Pope]

Here's the solution for organisers (I think it can be called the Gnomedex Solution):
Encourage everyone to blog, but make sure the wi-fi is so crap they can't actually do it. That's my experience of Gnomedex - wanted do, failed.

[Jonathan Carson]

I posted a detailed comment about this on my own blog which I'd invite you all to check out.

One note which I think is being misunderstood... This was client conference which no one paid to attend - I agree that a conferenc organizer seeking to build buzz for their event can get great gains from leveraging blog buzz. In this case, our goal was to provide value to the actual attendees - and the main driver of that value was the open sharing of their (often confidential) case studies.

We really appreciate everyone's feedback, and are anxious to push forward to find the right mix for these things in the future.

[Jim Estill]

I am not sure just because something is posted online that it means people will not attend.

Just because I write a book that says everything I say in my seminars does not mean people to not attend the seminars.

It is a different experience.

[makethelogobigger]

To not allow blogging at a conference is a step backwards these days.

And it's good Apple was mentioned, because a recent experience with them points out some problems they have with blogging. I’m their biggest advocate this side of Guy Kawasaki, but they need to get their act together when it comes to Steve Jobs and his conferences.

Things like a poor connection speed and having to rely on a VERY limited number of invited media blogs (like valleywag) made it a lees-than-perfect experience. I expected more from them.

Especially when the vw blogger had to go out in the hall and report every 10 minutes after the fact on what was said.

And not just them, but why not have live speech-to-text blog translation for all conferences so that people hear exactly what's going on in seminars and such?

I don't want a blogger's interpretaion of what happened while it's happening. Tell me later.

While it’s happening, I want the blogger’s role to be one of a court stenographer or transcriber and be as objective as possible in reporting the event.

Or even something like Guy did, invite agency people to a seminar and then post it online later. (The one I saw was on teens and their media choices, worth checking out here).

In the bigger scheme of things, isn't this whole new world-wide Web 2.0 experience supposed to be about getting the word out to as many people as possible, using as many media channels as possible?

Why restrict that.

[JoeDuck]

The relevant question is:

Should Blogging
ban Conferences?

[Brian Solis]

I can understand if they're trying to protect (i.e. sell) the content that they're sharing, but by drawing attention to the company, its data, the conference, etc. with attributions all pointing to Nielsen, it can only help...not hurt the conference and the brand.

[Ged]

I think that this says more about Neilsen's understanding (or lack of it) of developments online. Neilsen won't have the visibility as a thought leader and is likely to self filter many of the attendees who would make interactive and Q&A sessions more valuable for their attendees.

Next stop, would be no longer having a dialogue with the media through PR because it affect a company's IP.

[Search Engines WEB]

People also attend these high profile events for unique Networking opportunities

But legally - you can not stop anyone from blogging

perhaps Live blogging via laptops could be restricted

But there is also * audio blogging -* - there is absolutely nothing to stop anyone from leaving the room and using a cell - to create and upload an audio blog - or even using their cell to secretly record anyportion of an event

[Colin]

People are smart enough not to give away all the secrets that come with the 5 figure subscription, but by the same token the conference gains so much from the blog and comments, Forrester can only win.

[paul]

Freedom of the Press is guaranteed in the United States Constitution, but we need to find a way to tag PR slimes as PR slimes.

[Jonathan Carson]

Again, to clarify:

This was a customer meeting, not a "conference". Our request to attendees to not blog the contents of the meeting was based on the fact that numerous clients were sharing confidential case studies which they would not have been able to share if the meeting had been "on the record", and not on a desire to "protect" our own data. We quite actively publicize and promote our own data.

Thanks everyone for the feedback.

Jonathan Carson
CEO
Nielsen BuzzMetrics

[Bob O'Malley]

I'm involved with a group in Florida that recently blogged its conference. Prior to our blogging, many (older) members expressed reservations about the idea and some were very vocal about their opposition. Long story short, we blogged the conference, the buzz was significant, many non-attendees expressed disappointment that they weren't at the conference in person and have said they intend to attend next year, and our biggest critics have admitted they were wrong.

But don't take my word for it, let the market decide. Those conferences that ban blogging will lose out to those that do.

[Daniel Gray]

Gnomedex in the same breath as Forrester and Nielsen? Yow!

Cell network cards are one solution to bad connections in the conference room ... as long as it isn't lined with lead.

Carson does have a point.