I was somewhat surprised - no, gobsmacked - this weekend to read in a blog post by Abel Pharmboy that one conference in the USA - the American Society of Cell Biology Annual Meeting (sounds full of life) - has expressly forbidden its delegates from tweeting during presentations. They were also banned from audio recording or taking photographs of presenters' slides. Here's the strident message sent out to all delegates from the organisers:"Use of cameras and all other recording devices (this includes digital, film, and cell phone cameras, as well as audio recordings) are strictly prohibited in all session rooms, in the Exhibit Hall, and in all poster and oral presentation sessions. Twittering (see above) and other forms of communication involving replication of data are strictly prohibited at the Annual Meeting or before publication, whether data presented are in the Exhibit Hall, poster area, poster sessions, or invited talks, without the express permission and approval of the authors. Persons caught taking photos, video, or audio recordings with any device or transmitting such information with any device will be escorted out of the hall or rooms and not be allowed room re-entry. Repeat offenders will have their meeting badge(s) revoked and will not be allowed to continue to attend the meeting. This policy is necessary to respect the willingness of presenters to share their data at the meeting as well as their publication opportunities."
Wow. What do you think about that? Makes you wonder why they took such a decision and took such a threatening stance. I wonder what the delegates felt? Did they feel welcome and relaxed at the conference? If it was Twitter alone that was jumped on, we might point to some of the harshtags and Twitter lynchings of speakers that has been reported recently at other conferences as the spur. But no - it's all digital devices. Even the airlines aren't that strict. I know that conference organisers have a duty of care to ensure that everything is conducted decently and in order, but I am left wondering... is this all just a little over the top?
I'm only speculating but the reason behind this stance might be something a little more prosaic. It is highly likely that given the highly scientific nature of this conference, many of the presenters at the conference are presenting new research and wish to protect their intellectual property from their peers until their work has been published. This may sound like a reasonable idea at face value, but I ask you - why do we go to conferences in the first place? People have many reasons, but an aggregation of these reasons might be to meet other people interested in the same subject, to hear expert commentary and reports of research in your specialist areas, and to discuss and learn. In my recent experience, the beauty of digital media is that it can include those who cannot attend a conference physically, but who can still participate remotely. I have done this with both Online Educa Berlin and ASCILITE in Auckland this last week.
So the organisers of this conference have banned the use of digital media. Exactly what will the conference police ban next? Chatting to each other over coffee? Writing down notes on a pad? Will there be 'thought crimes' too (Bless you George). Will we all need to sign non-disclosure agreements before we can register for such events? I'm just saying.
Look. I assure everyone who attends the Plymouth e-Learning Conference in April next year that there will be no such bans on any image capture, backchannelling or any other form of dissemination of what you have learned. In fact it will be positively encouraged. Those who come to present at my event do so on the understanding that their ideas will be 'out there' and shared with all who are interested as quickly as possible. I agree with Terry Anderson's sentiments which he aired at this year's ALT-C conference in Manchester. Open Scholarship, he said, is not only about sharing your work free to your peers, it is also about being open to constructive criticism from them. Here's to open scholarship, and also to open conferences!
Postscript
To be fair on the conference organisers, I draw your attention to a note of clarification from the conference chair Rex Chisholm who writes:
"I serve as chair of the ASCB public information committee and have discussed this with the executive director of the ASCB. The prohibition as written is being interpreted (...although I can see why) too restrictively. The real goal is to limit specific tweeting of prepublication data, not the general concepts, the enthusiasm (or not) for an idea heard at the meeting, or comments about the meeting itself. The ASCB enthusiastically endorses spreading of exciting stories from its members and encourages an open discussion about the meeting. After all, science is about debate and discussion. On the other hand it is important to respect authors presenting data prior to publication. Hence the policy against cameras and against tweeting of SPECIFIC data elements. I am working the the ASCB leadership to "officially" modify the policy on the ASCB website. But I want to assure all meeting attendees that as long as the rights of the authors to not have specific data widely disseminated without their permission, we would like to encourage sharing about the meeting."
So I was correct in my assumption that the ban was intended to protect authors/researchers who had not yet published their findings. Fair enough. But the wording of the edict could, as has been admitted, have been a little better phrased. This little episode serves to highlight the growing gulf between traditional academic values and the insurgent social media practices that are engulfing education. I'm sure we will see similar issues arising as culture clashes continue over the next few years.
Related posts:
The dark side of digital backchannels (Joe McCarthy)
Tweeting expressly prohibited (Abel Pharmboy)
What do you mean I can't Twitter? (Steven W. Anderson)
Banning electronic devices from conferences (Open Education News)
Image source (edited)
No comments:
Post a Comment