Don’t get me wrong: I love Twitter with all my heart and soul. But this week, it started to get in the way.
Earlier this week, I spent a day at the New Media Summit. The event itself was a blast: the content was solid, and I met some new friends, greeted some old friends, and cemented a few “prelationships,” meaningful interactions I had with folks before I ever met them. (Hi Adam, Greg and Paul!) But during the sessions, my friend Matt Grant observed a phenomena that, once he pointed it out, started to bug me, too: Twitter was getting in the way of face-to-face networking.
The problem was that during some of the sessions, the presenters were asking folks in the live audience to submit their questions via Twitter, the online messaging tool. The folks onstage scrolled through their PDAs and picked out a few questions to read out and answer. And that was the problem: since the questions were coming through Twitter and read by the presenter, and not asked from the floor by an actual person, it was impossible to know who was asking the question.
Sometimes, the best way to get to gauge an audience is to listen to the questions, and see who is asking them. It’s also a great icebreaker: Many times at an event, I’ve approached someone after they’ve asked a particularly good question. But interrupting that process, by inserting Twitter as a filter between an audience and speaker, cuts down on the natural give-and-take and removed something I think is vital to a live event.
Twitter is an amazing tool. I am actually head-over-heels nuts about it. Among many other things, I had a good sense of who would be attending the New Media Summit, and could do some pre-event networking, to make the best use of my time. Because of Twitter, I knew some of the folks who would be there and felt excited to meet them. I feel the same way heading into next week, when I head to Phoenix for the MarketingProfs Digital Marketing Mixer.
But sometimes, it’s time to close the PDAs, turn to the person at the microphone, and turn off Twitter.
So what do you think? Have you observed anything similar, or do you think Twitter enhances a conference for those who are attending? Should I ask folks to Twitter questions to the speakers at the MarketingProfs event next week, or not? Leave your thoughts below.
I could see how this might pose a problem. When I spoke at Blog World Expo last month, we tried a variation on this that worked pretty well.
At my session, there was a large screen to display presentations at the front of the room. But since I was on a panel, there wasn’t a deck; instead, we chose to cue up Twitter Search and we asked everyone in the session (on Building Credibility as a Blogger) to use the hashtag #cred (http://search.twitter.com/search?q=%23cred).
What resulted was a controlled flow of comments, questions and information from our audience. We took questions directly from the floor as well from Twitter, and we wove both queries into our responses. When needed, I asked who particular Twitterers were in the room, and they identified themselves. It worked quite well. And participants got a kick out of reading questions up on the screen (just as we panelists did) and seemed to get more out of the session than if we were limited to 5-10 “live” questions from the audience.
If anyone is going to attempt this at their own event, I highly recommend using the large screen, Twitter Search, and a unique hashtag. And don’t ignore the people right in front of you.
interesting thought, Ann. I think that twitter can get in the way, but not in the situation you describe. I think there are a lot of advantages to using twitter as a complement to a q&a:
1) as a speaker, you always feel like you’re starting a conversation there’s never enough time to finish. By engaging folks in twitter, you can segue the dialogue to the digital side and keep the beach ball in the air.
2) lots of people that you want to ask questions won’t because they’re too shy in that live format. Twitter allows great questions to be asked and answered without putting folks in an uncomfortable situation.
Like everything else, it’s a matter of self-control. Twitter’s the new toy. I think it’s great for providing updates to an “outside” audience (I’m doing that right now at the Digital Pharma conference!), but when it’s time to talk to people, Twitter needs to take the back seat. On the other hand, Twitter has helped me meet several people at this conference, so it can facilitate as well as detract.
I think that the best parts of a conference are in the hallways. There are also lots of ways to break the ice, ask a top sales guy and he can give you a bunch. I also think that in very large rooms Twitter can give the people in the back of the room a chance to ask a question.
I couldn’t agree with you more. I attended a seminar recently and was appalled to see people twittering away while the speaker spoke. When I am speaking in front of a group I want eye contact, I want to be able to read peoples faces and body language. I don’t want them typing away and staring at their computer screens, to me that is doing a disservice to the speaker and is RUDE! I believe Twitter is a great social media marketing tool and should be used as such but when it starts to replace the human element of what these events are about…then I feel it becomes a problem not a solution.
I think twittering audience questions to ther speaker is intrusive, adn will make non-twotter users (one assumes there are some) feel like there is a whole separate world going on that excludes them.
Thanks for the ideas & feedback here, all. I kinda like Scott’s idea, above, as it seems a good hybrid. Maybe the key is to take some questions from Twitter but to link them to the folks actually typing them in the audience…? At least that would help address the persistent anonymity issue.
@steve & michael — I agree Twitter is a great facilitator and augments the conference experience in the ways you describe. I just don’t dig it when those in the audience are Twittering questions for presenters to read from the podium. Something gets lost there.
@chris — TOTALLY agree. “The best sessions are always in the hall.”
@valerie — I haven’t been to an event lately where almost everyone didn’t have a laptop screen in front of them… me, included. Have you?
Yes, Twitter is a great tool for so many different reasons. But I agree with your comments. There is a time and place for everything, and sometimes things like Twitter can be detrimental to normal human interaction.
Over the past few weeks I’ve had to recognise that Twitter was actually taking away from my family time.
I even posted the following Tweet: ‘Note to self: There is a life beyond Twitter. Feed the dog. Play with kids. Greet the wife.”
Like all things, there has to be a good balance.
Regards
Kevin
It sounds like the “experts” are doing exactly what we want our clients NOT to do: focusing too much on the “toys”/technology/tactic.
Tweeting questions when you’re in the room comes across as a last minute how-can-we-make-our-panel-more-engaging schtick.
I’m with you, I want to see and hear from the questioner (often because, in the social media world, you’re often seeing someone you read or follow in the flesh for the first time). I want people to take advantage of being in the same room by having real human interactions.
But there’s obviously a value to using Twitter with your panel.
Encourage people to tweet about your panel to the people who follow them who are not in the room. Encourage them to invite questions from those same people. Encourage those in the audience to follow each other and to connect — in person — while they are at the conference, if they discover folks with an interesting perspective.
But let ‘em walk up to the mike, clear their throat, and string more than 140 characters together when they ask you a question.
At BlogWorld Expo last month, we did a similar thing to what Scott mentioned in his post. For our panel on Corporate Blogging, we asked people to ask their questions via Twitter, and had a screen up with the live feed coming in via Summize/Twitter Search. As the moderator, I was responsible for hitting refresh every 10-15 seconds and bringing good questions to light.
It actually made for a much more engaging panel discussion. We were able to weed out the ridiculous questions and hone in on the ones that mattered.
More importantly, shy people in the audience felt like they had a voice whereas they wouldn’t have had one if we forced them to get up and ask their question on a microphone.
Cheers,
Michael
Ann,
Great post! I love Twitter, as it enables me to meet new people and engage in discussions I may not have otherwise had the opportunity to participate in.
However, I think it is important to remember one of the most important reasons we utilize these platforms in the first place. Open, honest and transparent two-way conversation is not always feasible; at least it wouldn’t be for many of us if it weren’t for these social platforms. While web 2.0 gives us this ability, nothing, in my opinion, can replace face to face interaction. Aside from engaging others who may not be present in the audience, it is hard for me to see the value in engaging the audience via Twitter, as opposed to doing it face to face, especially when they are right there in front of you. I also think it is important to remember that social networking tools should ADD to face to face communication, not replace it.
I think one of the biggest challenges we face, is that we believe we are all great “multitaskers.” When in reality, you can never be fully engaged in a conversation when you are also focused on constantly “plugging in.”
Like Alana mentioned, for a speaker looking out into an audience with all heads down and buried into their cell phones or laptops, it is intrusive–and even harder to gauge interest.
I liked Scott’s suggestion also–I just wonder how many people are really Twittering questions and how many audience members then become sidetracked by all of the other activity on the platform.
Thanks for all the great insight!
As a panel leader at the Digital Marketing Mixer next week, and even though I think Scott’s idea above is probably the best compromise if one is determined to integrate live with Internet feedback, my vote is for face to face interaction over digital intervention. Your post here brings up the many questions that nagged me about Web 2.0 and social media for over a year. Why do people chose to hide behind anonymous or virutal identities when they can have real living color relationships? Why do we chat, twitter and spew our opinions and lives all over the Internet to strangers yet don’t talk to our own kids enough? What ever happened to full-on human-to-human contact where you LOOK each other in the eyes and give one another your full and undivided attention? You know, it’s called a conversation, a relationship. I think anonymity has its place if you’re a whistleblower, but if you’re too shy to ask a question at a business conference you don’t need Twitter, you need a backbone. Your post said it Ann – we’re losing our intangible but powerful personal essence when we put technology between us as a filter or multi-task. My advice to everyone is unplug on a regular basis, especially when someone is speaking live in front of you, you’ll have a much richer experience for it and Twitter will still be there when it’s over.
Karen — Oh yes, Twitter will certainly be there when it’s over! : )
Thanks, all, for chiming in. My takeaway is that Twitter can enhance Q&A when it’s mingled smoothly with audience interaction. But definitely I think there needs to be some direct way to link the Twitter question to the actual Twitterer in the actual room.
As someone who /doesn’t/ use Twitter (yes, we do exist out there!), I have to say that I don’t think that Twitter should be used as one of the only ways to engage the audience. I’ve paid to be at the conference so that you can interact with me, talk with me, and teach me, and I can interact with you…. I didn’t pay to be able to ‘tweet’ my questions to the presenter.
As a person who doesn’t have the Internet on my phone and who doesn’t have access to Twitter, I think that I should have just as much access to the speakers and to ask engaging questions. (No, I don’t live in the dark ages, I just like unplugging once in a while, and I wanted to save money on my cell phone bill…)
Hmmm. I love Twitter. I’m on it all day via Twhirl while I’m at my computer. But I’m not set up to do it via the phone or other device because I refuse to be _quite_ that connected. Which means in this scenario, I would have been left out of the discussion unless I had a friend tweet in my question.
That said – I can see where Scott’s scenario using both live and tweeted questions would be a great balance in a large group setting. Too often, the people getting up to ask a question are just getting up to hear themselves talk and the best questions often aren’t gotten to. As long as your audience is one that’s connected, the Twitter idea sounds great. But I wouldn’t use it in a break-out session where there’s a smaller group dynamic. Shouldn’t be a need for it there.
And Ann, the last conference I went to, I was the _only_ person dragging around a laptop. (Accounting marketing group.) Don’t forget that there are a lot of market segments that don’t work the world the way the rest of us do.
Hmmm. I love Twitter. I’m on it all day via Twhirl while I’m at my computer. But I’m not set up to do it via the phone or other device because I refuse to be _quite_ that connected. Which means in this scenario, I would have been left out of the discussion unless I had a friend tweet in my question.
That said – I can see where Scott’s scenario using both live and tweeted questions would be a great balance in a large group setting. Too often, the people getting up to ask a question are just getting up to hear themselves talk and the best questions often aren’t gotten to. As long as your audience is one that’s connected, the Twitter idea sounds great. But I wouldn’t use it in a break-out session where there’s a smaller group dynamic. Shouldn’t be a need for it there.
And Ann, the last conference I went to, I was the _only_ person dragging around a laptop. (Accounting marketing group.) Don’t forget that there are a lot of market segments that don’t work the world the way the rest of us do.
Hmmm. I love Twitter. I’m on it all day via Twhirl while I’m at my computer. But I’m not set up to do it via the phone or other device because I refuse to be _quite_ that connected. Which means in this scenario, I would have been left out of the discussion unless I had a friend tweet in my question.
That said – I can see where Scott’s scenario using both live and tweeted questions would be a great balance in a large group setting. Too often, the people getting up to ask a question are just getting up to hear themselves talk and the best questions often aren’t gotten to. As long as your audience is one that’s connected, the Twitter idea sounds great. But I wouldn’t use it in a break-out session where there’s a smaller group dynamic. Shouldn’t be a need for it there.
And Ann, the last conference I went to, I was the _only_ person dragging around a laptop. (Accounting marketing group.) Don’t forget that there are a lot of market segments that don’t work the world the way the rest of us do.
Ann … we did this very effectively a while back. At Interesting South (www.interestingsouth.com) the MC turned to the audience and said, “would you mind reaching into your pocket, taking out your phone and turning it on”. He then provided the hash tag and a very brief explanation of Twitter. This transformed the relationship between the presenters and the audience in a profound way.
More recently, similarly to Scott, we projected the live twitterstream and hash tags on one screen up behind the presenters. There were ground rules though. And plenty of time for questions both from the screen (please stand up in the audience) and live.
But this is also a great way of running a panel. A while back one of the panel sessions I was attending was taken over by the floor simply because the back channel discussion was more interesting than what was going on at the big table. The challenge, of course, is having a facilitator who can moderate the interaction between the two.
I think it’s kind of appalling to sit distracted by an electronic device while someone is speaking to you. That’s a plural you. If the material isn’t engaging, leave.
I’m a fan of the old fashioned approach when people asking the questions verbally doesn’t work – hand out slips of paper.
You’re at a conference. There are people there – real live flesh and blood people you can talk to – about professional topics and also get to know personally. And you’re Twittering? Why get on a plane and go somewhere just to focus on your laptop or your PDA?
The conference Twittering thing has always seemed odd to me, other than as a way to demo the technology.
I use Twitter to keep in touch with people who are not in the same room with me. If you want to give shy people a chance to ask questions, there are more effective ways (IM, for one) that don’t limit you to 140 characters.
It’s a fun demo at a conference, but let’s not pretend that it’s anything more than that.
It was great catching up with you as well!
I agree that questions via Twitter can take away from a live event. It is a cool extension–and perhaps there are creative why it would be used, but I don’t think Twitter should be used for it’s own sake–”simply because we can”
Hi Ann,
Great post. Now, in life I’m primarily an optimist, but I’m about to sound otherwise:
It’s just going to get worse, don’t you think? You know, this whole social media- crackberry syndrome-completely disengaged w/ the present moment compulsion we adult ADD’ers have? We all want to show off and demonstrate we’re “in the know” — we’re totally hip ‘n happenin’ with the gadgets and widgets and cutting-edge communication strategies — especially at New Media events.
I think you’re right — there SHOULD be some sort of old-school Texting/PDA Nun at all events from now on, who raps our knuckles hard if she catches us ignoring what’s going on in front of us in favor of diddling around with our TwitPics, insta-feeds, etc. But there’s no common etiquette guidelines. Somehow we’ve confused being busy and pushing stuff out into the world with being alive. Sigh. We youth-clinging, psuedo-techie grownups are funny.
Thanks for sharing your experience. You’re not alone. It’s happening to us all.
Best,
Lani Voivod
Content Lover of Epiphanies, Inc.
http://www.EpiphaniesInc.com
“A-Ha Yourself!”
Twitter’s fun. Still not sure about the business use, although having connected with Bryan Eisenburg and Dave Chaffey perhaps I should review that thought. Using it to post questions at a conference? As we say in England – barmy!
I don’t think Twitter was the problem at your conference, Ann. As is so often the case, the tools aren’t the problem; the problem is the way they are being used.
When a presenter took a question via Twitter s/he should request the person who tweeted the question to stand up or wave and be identifiable. Prioritize questions from live audience members over someone not in the room (who heard that twittered questions were being accepted.) Add Scott’s (and others) suggestion for also taking spoken questions. INtersperse technologies. Make it a real MultiMedia presentation.
Valerie – it’s not just Twitter. In fact, I’ll bet that most of those people who were heads down in their laptops and blackberries weren’t in twitter. They were in IM, email, their slides for the next presentation, or the web. Or a game. At one conference I attended, the man next to me placed an order for something during the talk (head down muttering a cc number into his cel phone.) In too many meetings (at Work or paid conferences), people don’t seem to be able to unplug and I’ve seen their screens.
It’s great to be able to take notes or share back-channel comments. I love it when people like @whitneyhess live-twitters conferences I can’t attend! But other people misuse the technology. At least they’re not whispering!
So Ann, it’s not time to turn off Twitter. It’s time to engage the audience with the presenters as real people. Then the tools don’t matter.
I couldn’t read your opinion because your inline links were manipulative and kept me from reading further.
I couldn’t read your opinion because your myriad inline links turned me off from the getgo.
I think when you start leaving comments on other forums that are exactly 140 characters, it’s time to stop using Twitter for a little while.