Handbags at Les Blogs 2.0

I want to write a load of things about Les Blogs which I got back from last night - and I will - but I want to make a general comment about one of the more noteworthy incidents which took place yesterday.

Mena Trott, the President of Six Apart to whom I pay a monthly fee for the use and hosting of this blog,  gave a keynote speech at the start of the second day in which she advocated that all bloggers should be civil.  I wasn't unduly bothered by it.  I'd read similar pieces by her in the past and she has a view.  I would prefer people to be civil -even in disagreement -  and to that extent I agreed with her but it wasn't a view shared by all her audience.  I knew this at the time because I was able to read various comments that were being made on the back channel.

It all kicked off when Mena looked around at one point and saw that "dotben" had just commented: "This is bullshit".  Her immediate reaction was to exclaim: "What the fuck" and then she demanded to know who "dotBen" was. This surprised me because I'd been able to work out for myself that dotBen was Ben Metcalfe, who is both a blogger (in his personal capacity) and also an employee of the BBC  (an organisation to which I also contribute as a licence fee payer) where he works on the backstage project.

Ben very bravely (I thought) stood on his feet, accepted the microphone he was handed and explained clearly that he felt the whole presentation was "patronising"  and it was a view that was clearly shared by others.  I am not sure how intimidated Ben must have felt, but it's never easy to stand up in front of 350 people all staring at you and express your view clearly, let alone at a time when you have been unexpectedly "outed" for making was to all intent and purposes an "off the cuff " remark. 

There's a fair bit of comment on the incident today and Ben has now posted his own thoughts.  Having read them I have added my own comment (which I see he is moderating):

My recollection of the “public” events is slightly different from yours in that I heard Mena Trott say: “What the fuck” when she read the “bullshit” comment. I also think she got you to stand up and not Shel, but it’s not a big deal.

What surprised me at the time is she had no idea who “dotben” was, given there were only two Bens there: you and Ben Hammersley and it wasn’t exactly hard to work out which was which (Ben H. used “BenHammersley” on the backchannel). I got a sense that you hadwound her up the day before in which case she could have talked to you then, if she had wanted to.

The second more obvious problem was that it was her company, Six Apart, that had organised the conference, provided the back channel and projected it onto the screen at times. Given that there were no “rules” -and I am not suggesting there should be any - about how it was used, I was surprised that she took issue with it. I thought the backchannel was variously entertaining, interesting, boring, inane, amusing and dull but it certainly added another dimension to the proceedings. So it seemed odd that she reacted the way she did.

I thought you handled the public “shaming” very well, and your rant seems a fair reflection of what happened - or at least the bits I saw. Cultural differences lie at the heart of all this and I was left with the impression that the world is not as flat as some would have us believe.

Perhaps I should also add that although I met Ben on Monday very briefly, I do not actually know him, nor have I ever had any dealings with him.  Maybe  I feel supportive because he's from London and I have a sense that I know where he is coming from, but I would like to think that things might be handled a bit differently in future. 

If companies like Six Apart are going to put on commercial conferences with a backchannel, then this is what is going to happen. If people don't want to speak at these conferences then maybe organisers will need to look at the situation, but until then Six Apart needs to learn to live with the consequences of its decisions. Which all makes it sound much more important that it is. Because at the end of the day, it's only "chat" and that's what most people thrive on.

Comments

[Anil Dash]

"Six Apart needs to learn to live with the consequences of its decisions."

But isn't the more relevant point here that Ben didn't want to live with the consequences of what he said? And more importantly, as long as that level of hostility is considered acceptable in the blogosphere by people who are in the same room, how are millions more people going to start blogging? They won't want to join in to a free-for-all, and we're all responsible for making sure that people are encouraged to contribute to the conversation.

[Mark Lloyd]

Thanks for the comment Anil and I take your general point that outright hostility might well put people off blogging.

I actually think that Ben did want to take responsibility for what he said and if there was a conversation to be had, then he was prepared to have it.

The point for me was that it wasn't a considered remark in any way, shape or form and I don't think the backchannel was there for that.

By its very nature, it's a form of conversation and I think it is distinguishable from blogging. Like many others at the event, I didn't participate in it but that was because it wasn't for me. It seemed to be more a function of a tech conference than blogging (which might be an issue as blogging enters the mainstream) but I don't think that it would or should put people off blogging.

As I've said, it didn't come across to me as intentionally hostile,although I can see how it might appear that way. Ill-considered maybe. Glib, even. But not actually meant to be nasty.

Whether we are all meant to be responsible for making sure people are encouraged to contribute to the conversation is, I think, a very different issue. There will always be people who do encourage others to contribute and those who don't. One of the ironies of all this, I think, is that I suspect Ben is one of those who does encourage contribution.

[dahowlett]

Anil's way off the mark here. SA can't have it both ways. One of the ways they punt this medium is by relaying horror stories like Kryptonite and Dan Rather. Comments in those cases were far from polite.
There are also cultural issues.

For instance, her remark: "Why would you write something you wouldn't say in puiblic?" struck me as asinine for a European audience.

Sadly, I think Mena was ill-advised to make the speech. She's clearly very uncomfortable with this method of comunications.

Another issue is the impact blogging has had on American media. They can at last come out from their shells and write real stories instead of the sanitised stuff we saw in the '90s.

It was at those times that CEOs feared Europeans because we don't tend to mess about being flowery on issues.

Today, CEOs globally can expect the same treatment with little or no respect for position. Is this a good thing? I'm not sure, but if you believe Ben Hammersley's apocalyptic view of the world then IRC/commenting etc IS the new critique.

[Mark Lloyd]

Thanks for the comment Dennis. What was interesting to me was that Anil didn't actually declare his interest in Six Apart. It didn't matter to me because I know who he is, but I am not sure he should make that assumption. Any casual reader would have no idea he works for Six Apart.

[Anil Dash]

Sorry I hadn't made that clear -- I am in the habit of clicking on people's names when they comment, and the first thing on my page there is that I work for Six Apart, so it seemed clear. I'll make sure and mention it next time.