By: Graham

Graham — Tue, 23 May 2006 07:54:00 +0000

As an attendee at We Media my impression is that the more ‘open’ second day at reuters was far more successful than the ‘glitzy’ first day at the BBC.Gloria made some very good points about interactivity with people of all shades at the conference. I flitted between chatting about how best to sydicate blog content with the MD of Reuters to talking about book deals with an Avon lady blogger. People, in general, were approachable regardless of who they were.In my suggestions to the Media Center following the conference this is somethign I suggested, and which is not visible for those not attending, that future conferences should be more open. The real value for attendees is in the conversations over coffee and in pubs in the evening.Where (I think) We Media did score is in the partnerships that may evolve as a result of putting all these people ina room together. Fostering that is key to speeding success of We Media and seeding collaboration among attendees.

By: Gloria Pan

Gloria Pan — Fri, 19 May 2006 20:29:00 +0000

Paul,Thanks for your interest in the We Media Global Forum. I wonder, though, why you chose to pass along only decidedly negative reviews and not some of the more constructive ones? You even framed Dorian’s much-appreciated comments in a way that made it seem as if he found nothing of value from the conference. His post was neutral, yes, but I know for a fact that he had a pretty good experience.There was certainly room for improvement in the program, but for The Media Center, what was happening on stage was the lesser half of what the conference was about. We Media’s main purpose was to get a diverse group of people together – from the very grassroots to the acme of MSM – for mind- and perspective-changing conversation. It aimed to expose MSM reps to grassroots thinking in a constructive way, and give proponents of participatory media the chance to tap Carolyn McCall, Tom Glocer or Richard Sambrook on the shoulder and initiate dialog that could influence their thinking as they make decisions for their organization. It was a chance for anyone to engage Scott Heiferman or Dan Gillmor or Jeff Jarvis, people pushing the boundaries of social media, to throw around ideas on what could be in a perfect world. Here are some comments by people who may have started out rather disappointed by what they saw on Day 1, but by the end of the conference, “got it.” Michela Ledwidge, We Media Global Forum – Day TwoNeha Viswanathan, People at We Media and fringe conversationsMark Glaser, We Media, Me Too Media and Them MediaRachel North, We Media 2006And this just up on Kiernan McCarthy’s blog regarding the Internet Governance Meeting: “As ever, the path had to be cut by Nitin Desai, and it seems that he was impressed by the interaction at the We Media conference in London the other day – particularly by the level of interactions provided by blogs. In fact, Mr Desai mentioned blogs numerous times and how these views could and should be pulled into the whole process.” Nitin Desai, Special Assistant to the Secretary-General of the United Nations, delivered a keynote at the We Media Global Forum on Day 1 and stayed for the whole conference. So Paul, if we’re fortunate to have you join us at the next We Media conference, scheduled for next February in Miami, let me ask you, what would you do? Would you limit yourself to the role of program critic, or would you reach across the MSM-blogger divide and try to change some people minds?

Comments on: ‘We Media’ conference really about ‘them’

By: Graham

By: Gloria Pan