Tuesday, July 11, 2006

Caught on tape - The Rocketboom files. Would you like to be on YouTube too?

Did Andrew Baron of Rocketboom know he was being taped at CaseCamp? Did Eli Singer know? The clip was posted on YouTube, then yanked, then posted back.

Leesa Barnes at Podonomics has the scoop. Take a look at the comments on the Podonmics post for CaseCamp with Andrew Baron of Rocketboom.

It looked to me that the video taping was not known ahead of time, nor did it look like it was shot in "full view".

The problem I have with this is that I, like other client siders, represent large well-know brands. While I may feel empowered to share details of my work and marketing strategy/tactics in a room full of my peers, I am quite certain that I do not want it uploaded onto YouTube. Granted that my story (or yours) may not be as compelling or newsworthy as Rocketboom's recent troubles. However, it stands to reason that this exercise in secret taping may have implications for the future of CaseCamp. At a minimum, it will change the opening remarks given by Eli from this point forward.

The open nature of BarCamp / CaseCamp is a key attribute and attraction. However, the uncool result of this unconference stunt is that others may hold back in the future or refrain from presenting at all.

Informed consent would have been much cooler. Bryce of Chickentest, I don't think you had evil intentions here. However, whatever the intention, The Client Side view is that it could have been approached a bit differently.


At 10:26 AM, Anonymous Ken Schafer - One Degree said...

Hi Michael,

Lovin' "The Clientside" - keep up the good work.

I'm not sure I agree with you on this one. My current take is that ANYTHING I say in public can and very well might be blogged or taped.

I think the idea that "what happens at CaseCamp stays at CaseCamp" is charmingly old school. CaseCamp Toronto 1 was blogged about in some detail as were all the TorCamp events.

I guess there are two points here:

1. If you don't want people knowing about something, don't tell ANYONE who might possibly blogger or tape it.

2. If you are comfortable saying something in a room with 80 potential competitors, you need to get comfortable with the whole world being ABLE to know it - they're really the same thing.



At 11:51 AM, Blogger Michael Seaton said...

Hey Ken,
Thank for the kind words about The Client Side.

Re: CaseCamp, I agree with you in theory, but agree to disagree in practice here with one aspect only; consent. The issue for me is implied versus informed consent. The video taping did seem to be informed. I took issue with it on that basis alone because it has implications.

The BarCamp / DemoCamp model has recently been adapted via CaseCamp for marketers to share and learn. A whole new crowd is getting involved that may not understand all the ground rules and openness of the unconference world, myself included (to a certain extent).

My point is that, when representing a public company with many shareholders there are considerations. My speaking engagements across North America are attempts to share as much as I can in that light. I always have the option to know what is being made available to a wider audience.

The concern is that CaseCamp is not about polished and guarded presentations. New voices need to be heard and I fear the sharing may be limited. The breadth of information at future CaseCamps may suffer, ultimately making it just another conference. Presenters should be informed about the wider audience that could potentially tune-in. That’s all.

Andrew’s consent seemed to be an afterthought. If I am wrong I’d love to know because that changes how I am viewing this issue. For me, blogging about a presentation is a bit of a different animal than video taping (for me at least).

I agree that presenters need to be comfortable with the world tuning in and hearing what they say. That being said, I have a question. Does video taping have an effect on the intimacy of the “in-room” and participatory experience? For me, that is the ultimate community piece of the pie. Isn’t there an argument that it turns the whole unconfernece community into just another webinar model?

At 12:01 AM, Blogger Leesa Barnes said...

I was peeved only because for about 24-hours, my blog had the exclusive scoop. I quite enjoyed all the attention until Bryce threw up the video.

As I said on Bryce's blog, whether we record things said in public using pen & paper or a video recorder, getting permission to post it is absurd. Journalists don't have to do this, so why should we in blogosphere or podosphere?

Now, I draw the line if someone recorded me for profit without my permission. That would get my socks in a bunch, let me tell you.

At 10:03 AM, Blogger Michael Seaton said...

Hi Leesa, thanks for your comments.

I was stuck on the secretive aspect of the recording.

I fully agree with yourself and Ken that whatever is presented should go well beyond the walls of the CaseCamp room. Again, this instance was about disclosure that it was being recorded.

Everyone who presents at CaseCamp just needs to know how the unconference model differs from the standard old confernece model.

I think we can agree the crowd with Eli's incarnation is a bit of a different than the core BarCampers or DemoCampers, so there is a need to explain the platform in a bit more detail from the outset. Being a marketer that knows marketers, people usually need to speak s-l-o-w-l-y so I/we understand!

At that point, if someone does not want to present based on the potential to be posted on YouTube or blogged about, so be it. They were likely not going to share that much anyways.


Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home