Worldcon Comments

[major_clanger]

Worldcon was fun: a good venue that managed to be expansive without being too large to get around, a good set of guests and events and a wide range of parties. I went along very much with the view, after Interaction and Concussion, of just enjoying myself, and I think I can safely say I succeeded.

Other attendees (especially pnh have commented on some aspects that didn't go so well. Some of these, like Harlan Ellison's disgraceful behaviour at the Hugo Awards, were really not within the organisers' control. Others were areas where lessons could be learned, although I didn't feel they detracted too much from the success of the event.

The programme was huge; at one point, I noted I had a choice of 27 panels, and that didn't count readings, kaffeeklatches and videos. With all due respect to the programme team - and I know from personal experience what a tough job it is - I did feel that some panel topics were a bit forced or not quite up to an hour's discussion. More commonly though, potentially good panels were often let down by poor moderation; all too often, I saw runaway moderators forget that they weren't asked onto the panel to give a monologue on their pet hobby-horse. More than once, moderators seemed to have very different ideas from other panel members as to what the panel was meant to be about, or at least what approach it was going to take to the topic. (In particular, bugshaw was on an item that she and the other panellists took to be light-hearted, but the moderator seemed to think should be far more serious.)

The real problem I had though was nothing to do with the programme or its participants. I'm sorry to say that LACon IV featured some of the worst audience manners I've ever seen at a convention. One item I sat in - and this was an invited talk, not a panel - was marred by four loud mobile phone calls, a not-particularly whispered conversation between two audience members, and someone who felt it appropriate to make loud interjections and comments from the floor every couple of minutes. And that was just the worst example, rather than an isolated incident. I'm not quite sure what the cure is, other than hulking great programme gophers with cattle-prods, but I hope we find one soon.

Comments

[swisstone.livejournal.com]

One of the issues I've had with giving talks at sf cons is audience members who don't understand the difference between a talk and a panel. When I'm giving a talk, I have generally quite carefully planned the course of what I'm going to say, and sometimes the time schedule may be quite tight. The last thing I want is to be interrupted mid-flow from the audience. If there's time at the end for questions, they can ask then.

Fortunately, I'm getting better at training the audience to keep their mouths shut (and at stopping gophers interrupting me with my complimentary drink, which also annoys me).

[major-clanger.livejournal.com]

That ended up being a problem for this item; the two speakers had a good couple of dozen slides to go when they were given the stop signal, for the most part because they were being continually interrupted with questions and comments. Yes, audience interest is good, but it can turn counterproductive.

[autopope.livejournal.com]

The audience manners thing bears some thought. I suspect to some extent responsibility for dealing with it is on the shoulders of the talker/panelist, but it's certainly something the programming committees should think about. Looking back, I've been on 20-30 program items/talks so far this year, so here's my take on the problem (for what it's worth) ...

I've given readings in open venues where other stuff was happening simultaneously. In one particularly bad case, it probably rivalled the level of disruption of the talk you attended -- but because other stuff was happening, I pressed on rather than admit defeat and leave the stage. (It is, however, very unpleasant indeed to be standing on the stage when this sort of thing is going on. Serves me right for taking up the chance to do a reading at the Leith Dockers' Club ...)

In the more familiar context of an SF convention talk or panel, were I on stage when someone began behaving like that, I'd almost certainly stop the proceedings, address them personally, and -- if they continued to disrupt things -- I'd declare the program item over and leave immediately. (Exception: if it's a panel, then it is the job of the moderator, not the individual panelists, to deal with the audience directly.) The odd phone ringing is predictable and ignorable, but multiple loud conversations indicate contempt for the speakers and they're not being paid to put up with abuse. If it turns out to be a general trend in convention audience behaviour then we're in trouble, because some of our more interesting but quiet speakers will be put off attending or speaking.

If I was going to suggest any remedial measures for future cons, they would be: (1) a laminated "no mobile phones" notice somewhere visible on the way in to each program room, (2) some additional briefing/notes for moderators and speakers on how to deal with abusive hecklers. (Just telling moderators they are allowed to call for the ejection of audience members or terminate an item early in the face of repeated audience abuse would probably be sufficient in 90% of cases: there's a self-confidence issue -- "oh my god, will the programming committee be mad at me if I deal with this asshole?" -- that needs addressing.)

Luckily I don't think we (fandom) are at the stage where we're going to need to use this very often; if we ever find we need security guards to enforce it, then fandom as we know it is dead.

[swisstone.livejournal.com]

Once I realized that sf audiences work on a different set of conventions to an academic conference (who would never dream of interrupting in that way), I learnt to spell out clearly at the beginning that questions should be kept until after the talk was over. You have to be firm, and if someone still interrupts, remind them that questions are at the end. If they persist after that, ignore the buggers.

[major-clanger.livejournal.com]

Part of the problem with mobile phones seems to be that people are reluctant to turn them off or to silent mode. Indeed, I'd swear that in many cases the phones seemed to be at maximum ring volume! (And why is it that people select a distinctive ring tone and then take six rings to recognise that it's coming from their bag?)

As for the reaction of the speakers, the issue is often that what is going on is not really heckling as such - which I would hope most speakers or moderators would tackle - but instead more in the nature of thoughtless interruption. Quite often the culprit is actually making a vaguely relevant point so it's all too easy for the speaker to respond to it, or at least let it pass, rather than stomp on clear evidence of audience interest. As swisstone says, what is needed is for clear ground rules to be established at the start of an item.

[randy-byers.livejournal.com]

I also had the feeling that people had their phone rings cranked up to 11. Think the suggestion of putting up signs that say "please turn off your phone" (or perhaps "please turn on your vibrator" ho ho ho) is a good one. Maybe moderators should always begin with a reminder, too. This modern world!

[marykaykare.livejournal.com]

On the panels I moderated, I always asked, at the beginning, for people to turn off their phones or set them to vibrate. And, for the first time I can remember, people OBJECTED. One guy, sitting on the front row, had his go off loudly and repeatedly, after such a request. He later said he hadn't turned it off because he hadn't expected any calls! I don't know what the heck was going on with that this time around, but it bears some thinking about.

MKK

[swisstone.livejournal.com]

That's just unbelievable ...