#smc_mcr = Student Media Cafe Manchester?
By Mindy Gofton in Social Media Marketing on Tuesday, May 19, 2009 @ 11:11
So I went to my first social media cafe last week. Manchester's version of London's Tuttle Club has been running once a month since the end of 2008, but this was the first one I've actually been able to get to.
What I was hoping for was an event which would allow me to meet others doing similar work to what I do, or somehow working in the internet industry either professionally or as bloggers or people who actively use social media in weird and interesting ways discussing various creative uses of the online space and future developments.
I figured there would be a practical aspect - i.e. uses of this or that social media property for a certain type of activity such as, ways to promote your blog via Twitter; there might be a beginners track for people starting to get involved with social media, perhaps for work or even for aspiring bloggers; and I thought maybe there would be developers, entrepreneurs and others discussing social media on a more theoretical level as well talking about network theory, ways of blurring national boundaries and building new identities.
I was, however, expecting that the speakers would be professional, have reasonably well-thought-out presentations, and, erm, get their facts straight.
Sadly, I was wrong.
If you run an event, then run the event!
For starters, #smc_mcr normally runs at The Northern but had been relocated to the Contact Theatre for Futuresonic - in theory as part of the conference offerings. What this meant, however, is that most of the organisers were elsewhere doing other things and the setting was in the middle of the registration location - a noisy, crowded bar, so it was hard to hear anything. Considering that Futuresonic could have been a way to really generate publicity and increase attendance, they let themselves down by letting us all know that #smc_mcr was hardly a priority - after tweeting for a couple of weeks about how they were doing something special for the event!
They'd have been better off not billing it as a special night to fit in with the conference and just left things as usual to run at The Northern.
If you volunteer to speak at an event, be on time
Secondly, this meant that a couple of people, despite committing to turning up on time and running sessions, were over an hour late as they were at Futuresonic sessions. Frankly, if you commit to something, you should be there - it's very bad form. Some of us left work at the office to be there and were left standing around!
Make certain the speakers don't show you up with a lack of knowledge
Third, the sessions in question were not vetted, I am told this is because it is "the nature of a unconference event" and this would "spoil the spirit" - but frankly I can't see how having amateurs talking nonsensically about half-formed ideas that don't make sense enhances the event - or communication - in any way. In fact, in my mind, it goes against the whole idea of "social" media which is about communication - and there was certainly no communication going on, just mumbling.
Make sure there's something for everybody - at all levels of knowledge and experience
A couple of the sessions were of no interest as they involved a couple of people talking about ventures that have little to do with me and offer little in the way of what I needed (or wanted) to get out of the event - fair enough if others found it interesting, but I was hardly going to join those groups. A couple of the sessions, at least in the description, seemed far too basic to be worth my time - for example, as someone who has had a Flickr account since before it was bought by Yahoo, I didn't think I needed someone to tell me about the merits and uses of photo sharing online.
What was left were a couple of theoretical talks about the nature of the internet - which sounded intriguing in the description but were actually more akin to a couple of 6th form students rambling on about what crosses their minds at 3am after watching the latest Star Trek film.
In one instance there was a grad student talking about some theory that he'd come up with since the last #smc_mcr which was half formed, based around flawed logic and a wrongly defined word and who hadn't read 1/10 of the literature he should have read before presenting the idea to a group of strangers.
I was told that if I found a particular session poor I could have left midway through and gone to another one - but how can you join a discussion halfway in when you've missed the basis of the discussion - assuming that you don't look like a complete cretin for having stood up in the middle of someone's presentation when there's only 5 of you in order to walk off cause you're bored?
Use the resources available to you, not just whatever is easiest!
Manchester is full of internet professionals, bloggers and people with interesting ideas doing really great stuff online. It only takes a little searching via Twitter or through local blogs to find people talking about what they're doing and it would only take a little more effort for the organisers to actively approach people to run sessions who could produce a coherent and useful topic for discussion and then manage that discussion.
Establish the tone before turning things over to the masses
Simply making the event a free-for-all this early on in its life has meant that the tone has instead been set for future events to be amateurish, lacking in content and lacking in usefulness for the very audiences that #smc_mcr needs to attract to achieve any impact either for the industry or for the fostering of ideas and discussion.
Professionals such as myself will not see the point of sitting through badly constructed presentations presenting nonsensical ideas or presentations aimed at people just getting started using social media, which means that the students, the people using social media looking to turn it into a career, looking for funding for new ideas and hoping to learn something won't have the benefit of those of us with real practical knowledge (or that strong underpinning of theory, or even venture capital).
Use your power to destroy the misinformation and bad service prevalent in the industry
Ultimately, without somebody taking the whole idea by the horns and insisting that it become something more than what I experienced last week - something that provides a solid reason for professionals to turn up and contribute (and teach) and offer real knowledge both practical and theoretical to those people just starting out, it will flounder and die a death.
Or worse - in an industry which is full of untrained amateurs claiming to be "social media marketing" experts and offering services that may do more to harm businesses than help them and providing bad advice, what we don't need is a group claiming to be the place for people interested in and involved with social media to spread misinformation.
What we do need is a place where people who really understand social media and all its uses sharing ideas with each other and offering their expertise and guidance to people who want and need to learn.



Mike Blackburn wrote:
May 19, 2009 - 11:46Hi Mindy,
It's all well and good being critical but if you feel so passionately about it perhaps you should step up and get involved with the organisation.
Let's see how it can be made better rather than just damning it.
Mindy wrote:
May 19, 2009 - 12:01Hi Mike, I agree. I was trying to be constructive in offering suggestions for improvement. The issue I've had is that I have not been able to attend previous sessions due to a scheduling conflict and obviously I didn't want to comment without attending one. I was hardly going to put myself forward as a potential speaker not knowing what the tone of the event was or how things worked.
Hopefully future events will be at a less awkward date/time and not just myself, but others here I-COM can and will be willing to offer our expertise to the community - and hopefully other professionals will be willing to do the same for the sake of driving things forward for both business users and people who just want new ways to communicate with each other.
Martin Bryant ( @MartinSFP ) wrote:
May 19, 2009 - 12:49Hi Mindy, thanks for your thoughts about your first experience of #smc_mcr.
To address your points:
*If you run an event, then run the event!
- We actually had the event well-planned-out in terms of timings and organisation. However, we probably underestimated just how difficult it would be coming straight out of running a conference into #smc_mcr. Julian and Maria had lots of issues to deal with regarding the conference and I was running around ensuring everyone was ready to speak.
The next problem with running the event properly was the venue. I think it's safe to say we won't be holding the event there again. The size and shape of the areas available to us and the fact that other people were using the bar for socialising meant that basic things like making announcements were difficult. Having to have one of the sessions upstairs meant that communication of timings was more difficult than usual too.
At The Northern we don't have any of these problems - we have a microphone, for starters! Also the whole bar is usually ours exclusively meaning there aren't people talking over our event. We normally have a registration table where people 'check-in' and receive a name sticker. This helps establish easy networking between attendees.
Hindsight is a wonderful thing and it certainly was supposed to go a lot more smoothly than it did.
*If you volunteer to speak at an event, be on time
- I can't argue with this point at all - I totally agree. That said, we've never had a problem with speakers turning up late before.
*Make certain the speakers don't show you up with a lack of knowledge
- The reason we decided to go with an Unconference format is that unlike London, there are relatively few events in Manchester where people can find out about and discuss Social Media theory and practice in an open and relaxed forum.
Unconferences are by their nature unpredictable and vetting them goes against the whole idea that everyone has something to say. The idea is that if you don't like it you can run your own session next time or indeed call them out as talking rubbish after they've spoken if you want to. Although you may have turned up on a night that had a bad selection of speakers *from your point of view* I know that there were others who thoroughly enjoyed the sessions they attended on Thursday.
* Make sure there's something for everybody - at all levels of knowledge and experience
As it stands, it's difficult to ensure #smc_mcr covers a wide range knowledge and experience levels. Over the months the event certainly levels out in this respect. I'd agree that there's some work to be done here - probably through the introduction of some variety in what takes place. Unconferences are a good format but it would be good to hold other types of event as well. Jon Grant suggested some good examples via Twitter recently. It's definitely time to invite people to submit some more ideas of what else could be offered.
* Use the resources available to you, not just whatever is easiest!
- You suggestion of inviting people to speak has happened before - just not this particular time.
* Establish the tone before turning things over to the masses
* Use your power to destroy the misinformation and bad service prevalent in the industry
- I'll address these two together. I wholeheartedly agree that the event needs to offer more. This is (IIRC) the fourth Unconference-style event we've held and some more variety in each individual night would be welcome. That said, it's a very different event when it's held at The Northern, there's much more of a 'community' feel and it encourages networking at all levels much more successfully.
On a side note, while you quite rightly point out that 'unprofessionalism' in the industry needs to be stamped out, 'Social Media' is such a broad area that sometimes the 'unprofessional' approaches are just as interesting as the 'professional' ones. It totally depends on your definition of Professionalism.
To conclude, I'm sorry you didn't enjoy the event. It didn't show the 'best' that #smc_mcr can be when it's at The Northern. We'll certainly be looking at ideas to improve the variety and value of the event.
If you have any ideas please do share them.
Oh yes, and regarding the 'something special' we were tweeting about - it was frustrating that we couldn't do that in the end but the reasons were purely a last-minute practical
hitch. We will be doing it soon though, as it was a belter and would have really suited Futuresonic.
Mindy wrote:
May 19, 2009 - 14:11Thanks for the detailed response, Martin, it's appreciated to hear your thoughts about the whys and hows. I'm not going to criticise the venue because I realise it was impossible to have predicted how bad the place would be (or that people would talk rather than join in).
I think it's a great idea - in theory - for open discussion, but there has to be some level of guidance, particularly in the early days, to set the overriding tone and to encourage people to meet a certain level of knowledge if presenting on their own (or at least if there's a doubt over an individual perhaps at least get more detail).
For example, my issues with the sessions I witnessed were:
In my experience it is vital to set a tone and set a standard before you throw things open to the masses - this is true in online and offline communities - so that people understand what is expected. Where their knowledge doesn't merit them running a session maybe have an open forum where people can throw out ideas in question form - or on the Wiki beforehand, get a bunch of feedback and then have somebody present (or moderate) that?
Alternately, would it not make sense to have people request subjects and then find somebody with a bit of expertise to guide the discussion (or help put the presentation together) where the person putting the idea forward maybe doesn't have the experience themselves? That way it can be more of an interactive experience and learning experience?
As for the "unprofessionalism" issue, we speak to businesses every day who want to run a "social media marketing" campaign but don't understand what it is or what it should entail. I spend an amazing amount time talking companies out of just setting up a bunch of social media profiles and paying somebody to plug their business left right and centre because this is the terrible advice they get from the media, from so-called experts, and from examples set online.
It should be up to us to educate people that the emphasis in "social media" should be on "social" and not on "media" and why this is a good thing for their business and for the public at large - and this is where some plugging of the fundamentals and even social media etiquette would go a lot further to helping people than debating the semantic difference between words being used to describe the virtual world (as much as I love a good debate about language and post structuralism).
I have a couple of ideas I'd like to see discussed myself but I think I should get a better feel for what people want before putting myself forward as a speaker (and I need some time to tease out something coherent).
Julian Tait wrote:
May 19, 2009 - 14:48It's good that this is turning into a channel for debate about the smc_mcr.
I agree that there Contact was not a good as a space but it was there to provide a bit of cross fertilisation and I do know that some people took advantage of both events which is a positive.
As far as how the nature of the event itself, I think one of the reasons that people turned up late for their presentations was that we usually start later at the Northern as it is sometimes difficult for people to leave work and get food in time, so that was me in my haste to get things underway.
As far as the amateur/professional nature of the event or the type of presentations that people give, I think that is totally misunderstanding the nature of the event. It is for ALL people with an interest in Social Media. Social Media is not just SEO or marketing it is about new opportunities to create, review, analyse and enjoy. Primarily Social Media is about sharing and being well.., social and I think the smc_mcr does that very well. If you would like to see more presentations (conversations) about your chosen field propose a session, it would be great to have you add to the diversity.
We have had some really good sessions at smc_mcr and many of them have generated real projects and value. It's not broken it just needs some TLC and a bit of understanding.
J
Louise Bolotin wrote:
May 19, 2009 - 14:57I hope I'm not alone in feeling utterly depressed at reading the above blog. Thursday's #smc_mcr at Futuresonic was not ideal, mainly due to the venue, but having sat through lots of other sessions at the previous 6 cafés and run 1 myself, I think the criticism is largely unjustified. For one thing, I doubt any of the regular participants come to #smc_mcr and treat it from an academic perspective. People come to share knowledge and learn in a very laid back and informal setting. It's also very experimental so it's only to be expected that not all sessions will work as hoped.
It's very easy to criticise, especially when no offer is coming from the critic to help out. But to criticise after one atypical meeting is especially unfair.
Mindy, get down off your high horse, come along to some more sessions and get involved! The café is only ever as good as its participants, particularly those willing to get stuck in.
Mindy wrote:
May 19, 2009 - 15:04Sorry, I think I'm not being clear when I talk about "professionalism." I don't mean I expect everyone to be a professional marketer or that smc_mcr should be geared to a commercial audience - only that the quality of what people present should be well-formed and clear enough to both merit discussion and invite it.
@Louise Bolotin I would love to offer my services to present/organise/help but until last week I couldn't get to the event itself as I have other commitments that have made it impossible. If future events are on a feasible day of the week, as I said below, I'd love to help because I think the idea of #smc_mcr is a grand one. It is also something in its infancy, which I think both @MartinSFP and @juliantait have acknowledged. It takes time to develop anything of this sort but it's imperative to keep driving towards something better and to identify weaknesses and find ways to combat them.
I'm hoping this post and the discussion will help do that.
Adrian Slatcher wrote:
May 19, 2009 - 15:43Agree with Julian here. There's a real misunderstanding if the social media cafe just becomes a branch of the marketing/advertising/seo things going on in the city. Those things exist already, and, to be frank, can be pretty boring.
All the points on the organisation etc. I think we all agree with, Mindy. The unofficial team behind the event have done a good job in listening to people's concerns in the past, and sure If anything it highlights the lack of good quality venues in the city for smaller, user-led events like this. The Northern's been much better.
Weirdly enough, the programme at Social Media Cafe Manchester does seem to come together in a way that is varied, and of use to everyone. I could only stay for the first session: but there was a technical demonstration (Twaffik), a more general session on using social media (Julia's photo session), and a more esoteric thinkpiece (Dave Mee on the Merzweb). The later sessions looked similarly diverse.
Its good to have a fresh perspective on these things of course, and hope you manage to make the next event.
Simon Fairbairn wrote:
May 19, 2009 - 15:50Feedback's important, but your writing style is confrontational and self righteous. Not the greatest way to encourage meaningful discussion, if that's what you're really trying to do.
Ricky Chotai wrote:
May 19, 2009 - 15:55SMC Manchester is run by volunteers and we need to remember that, they put a lot of time and effort into it. The other key point to remember is that the networking is just as important as the sessions.
Dave Mee wrote:
May 19, 2009 - 16:46This is cowardly and mean-spirited. You seem to misunderstand everything the SMC is about.
I'm biting my tongue here, as you say
<blockquote>
Had this presentation been delivered in an academic setting he'd have been ripped to shreds (or failed the class).
</blockquote>
and I suspect you are referring to my presentation. I would rather you had opened your opinions up to the floor than present your condescending take on proceedings here.
Tim Roberts wrote:
May 19, 2009 - 17:19Steady on Mike! I think Mindy is only giving feedback and that should be taken as a \"Gift\". This is a great blog and as Julian states and I agree an excellent channel of debate for smc_mcr.
As MD of I-COM happy Mindy and others to get involved if it helps in the aims of the smc_mcr.
Mike wrote:
May 19, 2009 - 17:21Mindy's left for the evening now but I hope you don't mind if I chip in, I'm sure she'll comment back in the morning.
I think we should all take Mindy's blog in the spirit that it's intended, which was that whilst the event could have been really useful for all sorts of people last week's event was a bit of a mess. Indeed Mindy was not the only person who has told me what a shambles it was, most of it seeming to be down to the venue.
I was the first to comment that she if she wants to criticise she should be prepared to get involved, and hopefully she will. However, I do agree with Mindy that if something in the area of social media is being promoted it should be well organised and stand up to debate. There is a real danger with social media in that it could easily become "fad media", with people continually moving on to new platforms because that's the place to be. Witness the situation at Myspace which is suffering from declining traffic and subscribers.
To become part of the mainstream social media needs to break out of its current position where it's seen as something for "the kids" or internet junkies.
I'm convinced there are applications out there that can help cross the divide to widespread and continuing adoption but to get there we need to be able to have well reasoned thought and debate. I think we're poorly served if what could have been a great platform for such debate doesn't live up to expectations.
Louise Bolotin wrote:
May 19, 2009 - 17:43Mike, Mindy could have written a blog post that was critical yet constructive. But she didn't. She chose to write one that was aggressive, negative and patronising instead, and has only made excuses as to why she was not there previously, or even in the future. As others have said, if she doesn't like how it is now, she needs to get her Marigolds and be prepared to get her hands dirty. I'm sure none of the regulars would deny it can be a bit wobbly at times, even at the Northern, but the fact is the same people come back month after month to participate, have a pint or two and network/socialise, so the vast majority of the event every month must be pretty much the right mix.
Mike wrote:
May 19, 2009 - 18:02Louise, I take your comments on board - I think this debate is great and I want to assure you we're not just about slagging off your event, indeed we've written on this blog before praising it.
It strikes me that there is an interesting lesson to be learnt from all this, could it be that first impressions really do count? I think that if I'd taken time out to go to something for the first time full of expectation and hope I would have been a bit aggrieved at having my time wasted by people who didn't turn up on time or prepare properly to when they were presenting to me.
I'm sure I might have written a blog that said how disappointing it all was because it had missed a chance to do something great. I might not have written it as assertively as Mindy but I can definitely see where she's coming from.
I'd hope you'd be able to see Mindy's post for what it is - a plea to make things better.
Louise Bolotin wrote:
May 19, 2009 - 18:20Mike, I went to the very first #smc_mcr in October last year - I had no expectations and indeed I sat on a train and travelled 40 miles each way for it, purely out of curiosity and interest (and it helped I knew a few people who were going to be there). The important thing is I went with an open mind - I had no idea what was going to happen, or if I'd enjoy it, or learn anything, or leave with much to mull over. As it was, I don't think I actually sat through any of the sessions at the first one. I seem to recall just propping up the bar and talking to a lot of very interesting people. And actually, I had a really good time, even though it was, or perhaps despite it being the first one.
What makes #smc_mcr work is not the perfectness of the venue or a rigidly adhered to timetable - it's the people who go there prepared to share knowledge, to learn, to listen and to try new things. IMO, it's totally irrelevant how "professional" someone is or how many books they read beforehand. What matters is if they have something to say that others will hopefully find interesting.
My co-presenter and I didn't prepare our session at all in April as we had no time to get together in advance and we basically winged our way through it. It didn't matter as we had a lot of very useful and practical knowledge to pass on about our Twitter project, including all the mistakes we made and stuff we didn't think through properly at the start. I know for a fact that others planning charity projects using Twitter found what we had to say invaluable. That to my mind is where #smc_mcr really comes into its own.
The mix of people from a wide range of backgrounds is crucial. It would be really dull if it was all digital marketing experts and SEO monkeys. All kinds of people are using social media and bringing their experience and knowledge to the cafés and that's what makes it work.
Dave Mee wrote:
May 19, 2009 - 18:53Sorry to drag you in here Mike, you seem to have been shoved into a damage control exercise not of your making.
"It strikes me that there is an interesting lesson to be learnt from all this, could it be that first impressions really do count?"
Absolutely. And I wonder how many organisations will have had their first introduction to i-com via this discussion?
I think you have been very brave to maintain this thread open - there are other agencies in Manchester who aren't remotely as transparent - so kudos to you.
Adrian Stevenson wrote:
May 19, 2009 - 20:04Sorry Mindy, but I have to agree with the replies to the post. I\'ve been to a number of unconferences and smc_mcr is quite typical of these events in its style and delivery. If it\'s not your bag then fine, but that\'s what the unconference thing is. It\'s unfortunate that your first experience of an smc_mcr was the last one, as this was clearly not typical, but I guess I would have hoped you\'d check another one out before laying in quite so heavily. It\'s not really meant to be a professional event. As Simon has said, feedback is fine, but the tone of the piece was ill advised and has not done you or I-COM any favours at all, though I will of course not hold this one instance as being typical.
Sarah Hartley wrote:
May 19, 2009 - 22:20Many points I might have made, have already been made but.....as someone who is proud to have co-founded the social media cafe, I am sorry you didn’t get anything out of it, but at least you gave it a go. Hosting within the Futuresonic event was an opportunity to open the social media cafe to a potential new audience but there were problems – venue too noisey, Julian, Martin, Maria and myself too consumed with other matters are fair criticisms. But you know what? Not many people fussed about these inadequacies because this is a supportive community group. Many of us are happily giving over some of our professional expertise (at no cost) to assist each other in projects to further the digital community in Manchester. That is what it’s all about. I’m not sure what the seemingly disparaging use of the term “student” is about either. Looking through the attendee list on the wiki, I don’t see many students – isn’t there just one? (making your headline inaccurate). Even if there had been a complete classroom, what of it? We have world class universities in Manchester and would welcome input from some of the best brains in the country – only fitting in a city where a 17-year-old can be a tech entrepreneur. The cynical hack within does wonder what the motivation for this posting by an SEO company might be. Link bait? Page views? Comments received? Mission accomplished Mindy!
Christina McDermott wrote:
May 19, 2009 - 23:13Mindy. Whilst your post makes a lot of valid points, I don't think that referring to #smc_mcr as the "Student Media Cafe" has done you any favours. It comes across as sneering and antagonistic, which is a shame as it gets people's hackles up before they've even read the main body text of your post! I agree with everyone here that the Contact was probably not the best place to hold #smc_mcr this time around. It lacked the intimacy and the conviviality of The Northern, meaning that people were often struggling to be heard over the hubbub. Having the different sessions scattered throughout the venue also led to confusion, as people didn't really know what was going on where, what the sessions were about and who were hosting them. As it goes, I think that Manchester's Social Media Cafe is one of the best spaces currently available in the City in which people can share creative ideas and perhaps most importantly NETWORK with other like minded souls. I'm a Journalist by trade, and it's allowed me to meet and share ideas with people I wouldn't even have considered talking to before. It's a friendly space for everyone, irrespective of knowledge and ability. Manchester is full of SEO specialists and PR wunderkids shouting at the top of their lungs about the joys of social media and competing with each other about how much they know, and it does tend to put off people such as myself who are blindly stumbling their way through these new technologies and attempting to figure out how they can use them in their everyday work. Trying to structure the Social Media Cafe to a set routine would take away some of spontaneity and spark which makes it so fun to attend. I suggest that you and your colleagues attend the next one, prop up the bar and talk to a few people and really get involved. If you can, hold a session and advise people on new ways of working which they may not have previously thought of. It just seems a bit mean spirited to slag something off after you've only been the once and not really seen the best that it can offer!
Mike wrote:
May 19, 2009 - 23:51Dave, Thanks for your comments; I for one am proud to be involved with an organisation and people that are prepared to put their heads above the parapet and express their views. I'm also really impressed that the people involved with #smc_mcr feel so passionately about it.
I do think though that this discussion has got deflected by the nature in which last weeks event was critiqued. It seems to me that Mindy's piece applauded the goals of the cafe but simply wanted it to do a better job. There's also been a lot of discussion about Mindy's use of the word professional, I don't believe she was suggesting this should become simply another networking opportunity purely for the city's "SEO monkeys" - god knows there are enough of those already. My interpretation is that she was suggesting a more professional and formalised approach to the event might deliver all members of the community something more fulfilling.
I'm not sure that avoiding change because we're happy with the way things are is necessarily the best way to take things forward. I'm just hoping Mindy will take the chance to get involved more in the future - I for one will be there to support her.
Mindy wrote:
May 20, 2009 - 08:46Wow...erm...
I'm going to attempt to run through the criticisms levelled at me - but if your anger over the post is the title then you need to breathe deeply. The title was
If people read my tone as aggressive, I apologise. It's difficult online to tell emphatic from aggressive, especially when you don't know somebody. I also know that when you tiptoe around things online, you don't get a response - and I wanted a response. Throwing an opinion out there is far more constructive if it makes people stop and think and it generates a debate - and look, we have one!
I had high hopes for #smc_mcr, it's a great idea and has the potential to stimulate ideas, teach people and be a real boost to the internet industry in and around Manchester. However, the event is still in its infancy, and does have some weak points and one of those is a lack of coherence and lack of planning as to the actual subject matter. I thought suggesting
- vetting speakers;
- making sure the event addresses subjects for all levels of knowledge;
- discussing establishing a tone before making the event a free-for-all; and
- suggesting that a focus should be to wipe out misinformation
was being constructive.Clearly, people were looking only at the negatives I mentioned - but it's hard to explain my disappointment without addressing the negatives and for those who do know me, they'll know that I actually toned down what I originally wrote - I do not usually mince my words.
I've been criticised for only attending this one #smc_mcr and not having been before, but I have a class on Tuesday nights and missing it once a month would kind of defeat the purpose of taking the class in the first place - so I cannot attend the event when it's held on a Tuesday night. If it's held another day of the week, I'll be down there with bells on.
Finally, I think some of what I said has been massively misunderstood. I'm not suggesting that the event should be geared towards internet marketers, or "SEO monkeys" as we have been so condescendingly called (nicely ironic, I might add) - but that it is important to make certain that what's on offer actually generates the discussion or stimulates the debate that's intended.
When I refer to "professionalism" I'm not suggesting that only "professionals" should participate, I'm referring to the organisation and the tone.
I feel very strongly that the best way for all of us to learn from the event and from the experience is for people using social media for all purposes and from a variety of perspectives to get involved - my issue is that if last week's offering was the standard then you are likely to lose a lot of those valuable perspectives as people with my level of experience won't find it worthwhile.
I do realise that the venue itself made the social side difficult - I spoke to a couple of people, briefly, but it wasn't the ideal location and I realise this wasn't to be anticipated, which is why I've focused on the unconference format which has its weaknesses.
I do think, and I still hold to this, is that #smc_mcr is perhaps too much in its infancy for the unconference format to work as well as it could - hence the suggestion for a little bit of vetting or some guidance for those people wanting to speak who maybe don't have much experience.
I'm not now, nor did I ever intend to smear the event in its entirety - if I felt it was useless, pointless or stupid I wouldn't have bothered blogging about it, I simply wouldn't return.
diana wrote:
May 20, 2009 - 10:46this isn't the first time you've been criticised for being aggressive in your blog posts, to which your response is generally something like "oh sorry about that but tone is difficult to control online and I didn't mean it like that and I was trying to generate a debate" etc etc. There is a way to make your point without writing in such a confrontational manner. And if you are going to write that way, then at least have the guts not to back down and apologise for your style.
I've heard of smc_mcr for ages and have vaguely considered going along at some point but haven't had the time. I'm sure there WERE lots of problems with the event. But after reading this, I'm more on the side of the organisers and cannot take any of your criticisms seriously because of your tone and erroneous assumptions. You should have at least attempted to talk to the organisers before posting such an inflammatory 'review'. And I agree, if you think it's so bad, then try to become more involved and fix it rather than preaching via a blog post.
Mindy wrote:
May 20, 2009 - 11:03Ok, big picture here - the issue at hand is not nor should it be the tone of my writing.
Either the criticisms I've made are valid or they aren't and rather than nitpicking about the tone of my blog post or my choice of wording shouldn't we be focusing on the point I was trying to make which is:
How can the #smc_mcr events in future be improved?
I'm brave enough to allow people to shred my opinions (or, less my opinions and more me) - now proponents of the uniconference format, let's do something a little more useful and maybe focus on what people want to get from a Social Media Cafe, whether the current format is delivering that, if not, why not and how it can be improved in future.
That was the purpose of making my criticisms in a blog post VIA THE SPHERE OF SOCIAL MEDIA so that the organisers can get a full spectrum of opinions and weigh up their options and the relative merits of those options.
Louise Bolotin wrote:
May 20, 2009 - 13:07Actually, Mindy, the tone of your post IS part of the issue at hand. You managed, in one stroke, to piss an awful lot of people off including the organisers and a lot of the regulars - all of whom would acknowledge things are not perfect but #smc_mcr is always being tweaked anyway to make it better and try different ways of doing things.
And I don't think you're really in a position to demand "improvements" when you've only been to one, yes one meeting which was hardly typical. The café works well for pretty much everyone else so you might care to consider that it's you who is out of step with #smc_mcr rather than vice versa. I'm really disappointed that you continue to pursue such a self-righteous tone and standpoint when clearly you are pissing into the wind here...
Chi-chi Ekweozor wrote:
May 20, 2009 - 14:38Wow, what a lot of debate has been stirred up here.
Before I continue, can I point you to my post-event review of Thursday's Social Media Cafe which I drafted after returning from the event and published early on Friday: And so 7 Wonders In 7 Days #90909 launches at Futuresonic 2009
I was one of the speakers and, unfortunately, due to events outside my control, I arrived late. My disclaimer is in the post above. However, as Julian pointed out in an earlier comment, I assumed that the talks didn't start till 6:45pm as they don't normally.
I spoke at the first Social Media Cafe event back in November and at a couple of others since and blogged about them on each occasion. You can read those articles here: Archive of articles on Social Media Cafe Manchester at realfresh.tv Having said all that I’ll say this.
Mindy, it's really sad that the first smc_mcr you attended wasn’t the best.
The team organising the event really wanted it to be a showcase of what the Social Media Cafe has become: a really valuable avenue to meet and network with likeminded professionals interested in using social media.
Unfortunately, the venue, poor time keeping on my part and a host of other things let you down.
Come down to the next one and let’s keep the discussion ongoing on how to make them better for all concerned.
Clair wrote:
May 20, 2009 - 15:18A little late in this debate, but I too was at #smc_mcr in the Contact Theatre and it was my first time at the event as well. To give you a little background I do specialise in SEM and totally and wholly understand the full benefit of social networking as an aid for SEO and B2C communication, however I don’t have the passion for it.
This is why I felt I wanted to attend - without knowing what to expect and having no expectations I thought that finally I would “get” social media in the same way that those I work with.
Right from the start it was difficult to find out what was going on. While I realise that the organisers had no control over the noise in the venue, this made it difficult to follow what was being said and the sessions choices themselves were very un-related and in some cases very basic - at least in the descriptions we were given when presented with the choice of what to do.
I completely understand that every session can not speak to everyone but the later choice of sessions were so off-the-mark that I came away feeling I had lost a few hours of my life and, you got it, nowhere near the end of my quest to find a passion for Twittering.
On this point I was also very surprised by this blog post considering how bad the actual experience was. For one I found it one of hope for the future through constructive criticism and secondly not a personal attack on anyone at #smc_mcr. Whether or not I would go again? I would like to think so - in the future when issues have been ironed out - but definitely not based on last week's experience.
Julian Tait wrote:
May 20, 2009 - 16:20Drawing a line under this.
The next Social Media Cafe is at The Northern, 56 Tib Street, Manchester on Tuesday 2nd. You can sign up on the wiki http://socialmediacafemanchester.pbwiki.com SMC will be back at it's normal venue and we will be a bit more in control.
Julian
Rob Gough wrote:
May 20, 2009 - 16:52I, unfortunately, couldn't make this months smc_mcr though I do consider myself a regular. One thing I noticed is that previous smc_mcr were not what I initially expected them to be, even after hearing about the first session.
As a developer, I was expecting the event to be mostly developer-oriented. Especially as most of the events I've heard of in this style have taken place in more geek-centric circles. What I came to realise throughout the first session I attended, and backed up in subsequent sessions, is that it is an interesting melting-pot of different people from various different professions all with a common interest in social media.
This obviously gives rise to the issue you have mentioned regarding how advanced the evening is. As you mention, for a lot of people, a talk on how to use Flickr is going to be something I would imagine the majority of attendees aren't looking for. However, I think sessions like that are important for people who are new to social media, and have only come along to learn a little more because they recognise both how little they know, and that it is something they want to learn more about.
Right now there aren't a great many groups getting together just to talk about social media in general. If you are after something more specific, then there are groups around for that sort of thing - and obviously they will be at a more advanced level (if there isn't, then perhaps that is something you should consider setting up). Social Media Café is, and has to remain (IMHO), something that is open to the newest members with little to no experience, right up to the professionals.
As it goes on, the people initially involved with smc_mcr will find their own experience (and more importantly, confidence) growing and I think that the more "advanced" levels will naturally be formed- and as their discussions grow in complexity so too will the people (hopefully) wanting to come and talk. And even at that point, there is likely to be a large difference between one months session and the next.
Hopefully after time this will mean that speakers will be queuing up, so that we will know a little more in advance who and what talks are expected to be about - that way people will only come along if they feel there is a session suited to them, or at least are well aware in advance that there isn't a session they are particularly interesting in - and will come along for the networking anyway.
Also, you mention the experience level of the talkers. That is the nature of the unconference format (and please note that it's un-conference, not uni-conference http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unconference). My experience from the talkers at previous events (as I wasn't there, I can't speak for the last event) is that they weren't claiming to be authorities on a subject and when an audience member knew something they didn't, both the other audience members and the speaker were quite happy to listen to them and add that to the conversation. Another reason these are sessions, nor presentations.
It is a shame that you didn't feel comfortable enough to add your thoughts into the session you were involved in, though I think that once you have attended a few Café nights, you would feel more confident to do so. I know that each time I go, I talk to a few more people and get myself involved a little more.
Anyway, I've said *way* too much. I hope that you take on board some of the things that people here have said, and that, classes and dates permitting, you find yourself able to attend a future session. I hope that you don't take this as a response to your criticisms, and I'm not saying that they aren't valid... but that it is still early days and each meeting is shaping the future meetings - feedback is still very much appreciated, although I could understand if you didn't feel like that right now.
Regards,
Rob Gough
Kate Butler wrote:
May 20, 2009 - 23:49Mindy, when all is said and done, I hope your experience hasn't put you off attending future #smc_mcr events. I think if you come along and see how we operate at The Northern you'll get a better idea of how the format works and get to know some of the fascinating people involved in a more relaxed, easy going setting.
Mindy wrote:
May 21, 2009 - 08:38Thanks for the additional comments Rob, Kate, Julian, et. al.
I'm not put off and I hope there's something at the next one (or so) for me to praise. I just may turn up wearing body armour ;).
Dave Mee wrote:
May 27, 2009 - 11:27Hi Mindy,
one of the presentations you had such an issue with is up at <a href="http://tandot.co.uk/content/the-merzweb-web-20-and-the-1930s-avant-garde/">TANDOT's website</a>. I'd like to invite readers to draw their own conclusions in an open channel on that page. In the meantime, you've still not responded to my requests for your criticism, so I'm assuming you didn't really have any, and just felt better denigrating everything to do with the evening by proxy. To each their own; hopefully your visitors will be able to draw their own conclusions.
Look forward to seeing you and your colleagues at the next <a href="http://socialmediacafemanchester.pbworks.com/">#smc_mcr</a> event.
Mindy wrote:
May 27, 2009 - 11:57Hi Dave,
I've put the comment live, although I'm not sure why you've posted it. As I said privately, I haven't sent you my criticisms because I simply have not had time. The needs of our clients have priority and so I did not want to take any more time away from them to respond to this ongoing debate.
I will email you privately, in my own time, when I get a chance.
The crux of my issue, however, is that you are drawing a comparison between things which are only accidentally similar - which makes it a faulty comparison. For example, just because I have a friend that looks like Jimmy Nail, doesn't mean he is Jimmy Nail. He's just a guy who we happen to call "Hugh Jears."
Dave Mee wrote:
May 27, 2009 - 12:21Mindy, the difference is that there is a cultural continuum which conveys theories and process, whereas your example does not. Damien Hirst cites Schwitters as an influence; collage and cutup became core practices in both the arts and literature. If you are arguing that these ideas have not perculated down into our electronic lineage through people such as Englebart, Nelson and Berners-Lee, you are looking at our cultural environment as though it were a precise mathematic equation. It is not. I think you need to take a broader perspective of how our spheres of communication operate.
If you'd have raised this issue on the evening, we could have easily discussed it. I have no idea why you had to take such a patronising take in your post, particularly for such a mistaken argument.
Thanks for raising your response, however. It is appreciated.
Julia wrote:
May 31, 2009 - 17:55Hi Mindy and all,
This is a very belated comment, but after reading the post and discussion, I thought I should leave it. I also work for an agency these days, and so my company's needs, as well as the necessity to edit and start blogging all the recorded material from Futuresonic, were a priority.
Quite frankly, I didn't expect such a debate, although I was one of the speakers, and even I was a bit lost at the venue.
A note about the acoustics - I was a member of the academy myself once, and gave a plenty of presentations at conferences; having changed professions, first to Media, next to Digital Marketing, I have had many more opportunities to speak in front of the people. The reason I mention this from the start is that it wasn't a problem for me to speak at the venue that was far from ideal - but of course, the acoustics was probably putting a check on the visitor's "will to live", figuratively speaking. I wasn't shouting at the top of my lungs to be heard, but I'm very grateful to one of the attendees of my talk who had to seat at the very back, and never left, although I do wonder how well he could hear me. Having been restricted to my laptop also didn't make things easy. I'm also glad that @timdifford was so supportive. :) But, if this was my first session, I would certainly not be so disparaging, and would make an effort to come to the next one. If the next session proved just as bad - fair enough, I'd shred both the event and organisers. :)
To put things right, my session was looking at photo sharing online - not simply at "how to use Flickr". I was planning on delivering the talk in April, but fell ill. I am passionate about photography, so one of the points was actually about how photography has been changed by Social Media and the availability and omnipresence of editing tools. You may say I should've worded it better; whilst I agree, I may also say that no-one should assume that photo sharing or online photography is all about Flickr - I certainly don't. The session looked at privacy and decency, copyright and publishing permissions, as well as some trends in photo sharing today. Indeed, Flickr was the focal point, mainly due to its huge user base; however, the conclusion drawn concerned photography, not just a single service. I have been using Flickr since 2007, and have had a great time doing so as an individual, not to mention all the knowledge that contributes to my professional activity. I consciously made the session fairly generic, though, for I was sure, and some questions proved me right, that my listeners would have a very diverse experience and knowledge of these services.
At the same time, I regularly come across many a business account on Flickr, some were set up by Social Media professionals I know, and strangely enough, those accounts are barely "optimised": titles are too basic, no descriptions, no tags. I am sure the people in question have been using Flickr since it was bought by Yahoo! because they are older than me, but this certainly questions the correlation between how long they've been using it, and how well they've been doing so.
The whole point, therefore, is that nobody knows for sure how to use Flickr or such like, or what to do with metadata that comes with it, or how to tackle the copyright, etc. Earlier this year Journalism.co.uk published an interview with a photographer who was disappointed by his experience of "Flickring". I wrote an article in response, pointing out to the very obvious mistakes he made that would never see him generating the kind of response he was secretly hoping for. We have had some communication afterwards, and I am glad to say that he has taken the criticism on board. But, of course, many organisations and individuals are not aware, e.g., of the opportunity to collect statistics on Flickr, provided you have a paid account. Maybe this is not necessary; but, if not for search queries, this is important to see if or not your photos were used on other sites.
I have been on Manchester's blogging scene since 2006, and in 2007-2008 I was attending all the BBC Manchester Blog meetings, having been on their blogrool, as well. I have said in the past that Futuresonic 2006 well and truly opened up the field for me (http://www.loscuadernosdejulia.com/2009/05/drew-hemment-from-futuresonic-to-future.html), so, in spite of all problems with the space, I am absolutely happy to have spoken at the venue that housed the event that has changed my life in a good way. I am not apologetic about Social Media, and even during Social Technologies Summit I tweeted (sic!) about my annoyance that all Social Media boils down to Facebook and Twitter these days. For a start, Facebook is a network; if the term is needed, I'd rather use Stowe Boyd's "social tools" - but I fear "tool" may be considered as misguiding by some. All in all, though, I am both passionate and critical of Social Media for all good reasons, and it certainly doesn't boil down to a handful of services, as far as I am concerned.
Speaking of the unconference format - I have been "facilitating" one of the discussions at the Digital Britain Unconference at MDDA earlier in May. Such is the format of these events that, yes, they are wobbly. But I can't help agreeing with Louise when she said one needed to come in with an open mind. I also don't think that "finding the voice" is necessary for #smc_mcr. This is a blogging adage that "thou must find thy voice", but it may see you shoving yourself in a box. I appreciated one of the speakers at Futuresonic making a point of not labelling oneself with one single identity, and I completely share his view (as a writer, too). I've been to bloggers meet-ups, I've been to a few #smc_mcr's, and I must say, I've always gone away with food for thought - not necessarily about Social Media, by the way. The point about having an open mind is crucial: not only as the way to be more forgiving of the shortcomings of others, but also as often the only path to a discovery.
It is sad that, by the look of things, you will not be able to attend the June session, as you mentioned you had a class on Tuesday. As for me, I am certainly looking forward to going and meeting people, some of whom I've known for a good few years. I have no doubt some improvements will be made to the format, but I also agree with everyone who thinks that this event should be a meeting place for professionals of all kinds and merits to meet and speak to each other. I, for one, am terribly at odds with "authority" because that often turns into "authoritarianism". The longer #smc_mcr avoids that trap, possibly at the expense of some online criticism, the better.
Best,
Julia
Mindy wrote:
Jun 01, 2009 - 15:15@Julia Thanks for the response. It sounds like the presentation would have been interesting. I am familiar with your blog and have no doubts as to the depth of your knowledge. The way the session was described both on the #smc_mcr site and prior to the session made it sound like it was targeted at a more inexperienced audience - so we went to a different session. I won't be there tomorrow, but I'm aiming to get to the July event.
@Dave I didn't want to get into it there because it was hard to hear, we weren't 100% sure we were hearing what you were saying correctly. I've been avoiding getting into it here because I didn't want the blog comments to descend into "I'm right and you're wrong" "No, I'm right and you're wrong" for the same reasons I left academia - it's pointless and frustrating and nobody changes their mind.
I don't feel my argument was misguided because "cultural continuum" or not, you're talking about something which was consciously meant to be part of an art project cum cutural experiment whereas there's nothing remotely conscious in this way on most of the websites you pointed out.
Most of the changes and developments you mentioned happened for COMMERCIAL reasons. It's not like a sub-culture moving more mainstream over time (http://www.amazon.com/Subculture-Meaning-Style-New-Accents/dp/0415039495/ref=pd_sim_b_6) -
Facebook added features to stop users leaving the site to access games and video and images, etc., and to find new ways of creating advertising revenue. Businesses developed CMS systems to make updating their websites simpler and more efficient (and less expensive).
You're comparing an art experiment which, if I understood you correctly, is meant to mirror the unpredictability of life and which was consciously a communal art project with what is nothing more than the natural ebbs and flows of human communication and commerce.
Julia wrote:
Jun 02, 2009 - 10:25Mindy,
Thanks a lot - well, all I can say is that I'm certainly looking forward to catching up with my colleague some time soon at #smc_mcr!
Best,
Julia