Online Access at the Annual Meeting: We Weigh In...We Hope You Will, Too!

I would like to see this be a routine expectation, linked to having one's program and participation accepted, that all participants will provide some text, at least, that corresponds to their presentation content.  PowerPoint slides would do, although annotated slides would be even better.  One of the session chairs duties could be to assure that these are submitted or to gather and submit them.

Before we get to WiFi, I think we should tackle the issue of a reliable wired connection to each meeting space for the presenters to use.  Back years ago when WiFi was originally called for I think it was a bigger deal, as most folks used the laptops for the Internets.  Now that tablets and smartphones are vogue, wouldn't cell network access in the meeting space be more important than unsecured public WiFi.  Sure you use your own data plan, but would it cost SAA more?  As a revenue stream to fund the meeting access, perhaps this can be decided by each section or roundtable.  Virtual access to meetings could be added as a small fee to section/rt membership and the section/Rt meetings and sessions they sponsor would be covered.

If we do virtual conferencing, maybe a small selection or some unique virtual-only content that could be accessed by meeting attendees later.  I'd want to preserve the bulk of the live content for attendees for a period of time, such as with the recordings.

I've purchased the recordings for years.  Download is fine.  I'm cool with the CDs of MP3s too.  The time lag is not great and they are easy to copy over.  My beef is that not all sessions are recorded.  We allow individuals to opt out, AFTER the session is accepted.  This is not acceptable.  We should make recording a requirement for acceptance of the session and everyone should be required to sign off individually on recording (and web access and virtual) as part of the application.  In the extremely rare case that so very confidential matters are discussed (maybe rising to the level of political refugees, mob informants, or something) we can have some audio redacted.  Otherwise record them all as a matter of course.

Apps are fine.  My only request is that they are cross platform.  If they aren't going to be and we only have time or funds for one platform, then forget it.

Absolutely preserve the meeting content.  I go back to it all the time.  If the recordings or transcripts will be more widely available, then there will be additional requests for the slides and supplementary materials that the speakers are referring to.  Right now, since there is little recording available, folks are accessing the slides or attachments out of context, so of course the use is less.

1) Wi-Fi: Wi-Fi in the whole hotel--guest rooms, common areas, and meeting rooms--is a no-brainer. It seems that the more upscale the hotel, the more they nickel and dime you on these services. So frustrating that when I stay at a really nice (expensive) hotel they charge for internet access (wired or Wi-Fi) while the more modest hotels include it. I was recently on a trip in Scandinavia, where we stayed at a range of accommodations—every hotel, modest or upscale, had free Wi-Fi that was easy to access (pickup the daily password at the front desk, usually a glass of tiny little slips of paper). It was standard, no question (as was breakfast of some sort, but that’s another issue). Here’s hoping the US eventually gets there.

2) Virtual conferencing: The Business Archives Section has done this a few times so you might talk to them about what service(s) they used, how well it worked, what it contributed to the meeting, what feedback they’ve received, etc. This is something I am less likely to use except for selected portions of the meeting, particularly in real-time as I’ll be at work.

3 and 5) Recordings and other meeting content: I see these as working in concert.  There are many times where having the slides is only a tiny part of the picture (really should be the case for good presentations) and you need what was said. On the flip side, there are sessions where the recording doesn’t work because they are talking about something on a screen. Guess I am assuming you’re talking about audio-only recordings. If you are talking about video recordings, I think about how talks and meetings are recorded at my workplace. These recordings do include the speaker and the slides, but they can be deadly dull and difficult to watch—camera doesn’t switch to the slide at the right time or doesn’t stay on it long enough, focus is too tight and you don’t get the interplay between speaker and audience, focus is too wide and you can’t catch what the speaker is saying, etc. We used to get the slides for all-hands meetings, but now it is a video so it is really hard to find a particular point that you need to follow up on even though they break the video up into chapters. I really wish I had both. I think Kate and others have already covered my other thoughts on the recording topic better than I can.

Oh, except to add to Christine’s mention of transcripts and captioning. A representative of the Stanford Captioning System made a really interesting presentation to the archivists about this topic. They have a nice summary of the benefits of captioning at http://captioning.stanford.edu/. My key takeaway (beyond all the ideas it gave for our oral histories and other recorded content) was that captioning and transcripts also improve accessibility in that they make the content indexable and searchable including by search engines. Though the transcripts and captions are created for disability accessibility, lots of others benefit, kind of like curb cuts benefit mothers with strollers in addition to the mobility-impaired.

4) App: If there is an app, it can’t be simply a mobile web site as it was in Chicago. I had no coverage in the bowels of the hotel and could not access it unless I went up stairs. I also remember being frustrated with the scheduler because you could only put in official items from the program, not your own items such as lunch with so-and-so or personal meeting times. For the program I simply download the PDF and would do that with handouts of eatery lists and such if they were available, so an app better have more value added and work offline to be worth the investment.

For several years, as a member and now chair (on the ALA side) of the joint SAA-ALA-AAM committee, I've provided my own wifi for committee meetings and provided a mechanism (Skype or an online meeting tool) for virtual participation. Wifi is provided through a Verizon MiFi device using a "pay-as-you-go" account, which costs $30 for a week, enough to get me through the conference. This fee is much cheaper than the $10.95/day or so that hotels often charge (I've seen charges as high as $15/day). I provide my own computer, speaker, and microphone to handle the virtual meeting. 

The SAA chair has requested similar equipment, and it could be useful for other committees. Similar proposals have been made on the ALA side, to "institutionalize" this approach to virtual meetings, but at ALA we are usually lucky enough to be assigned a meeting room with wireless internet. 

In theory, the MiFi approach would allow me to also provide wireless access to four other people. In practice, I've never opened it up to anybody else (but if you ask me nicely...)  

I don't think this is a viable approach for the meeting as a whole, but you could consider it a stealth pilot for small committees or virtual presentations.

Danielle Cunniff Plumer

Is there a limit on comment lenghts? If anyone would test that limit, it would be me! ;) 

4) Confernce app: I'm less passionate about this one, but I do think an app would be useful. Including things like restaurant guide, locations of nearby handy things like coffee, drugstores, etc would be good. Possible to include searchable attendees list too? 

5) Other conference materials: Yes to slides and papers, which SAA already does. I think just finding a way to promote that resource more effectively or make the content more easily accessible would be a good idea. Did you mean to ask here about remote access to component meetings, such as section and rountable meetings? To me that is a separate question from access to the educational sessions, and I'm not sure how important I think it is. If groups had reliable Internet access, they could try to find ways to share meeting content themselves, though things like liveblogging or tweeting it. The structure and value of component group meetings varies so widely that I think it would be best just to make sure they have Internet access and then let them take responsbility for figuring how what kind of remote access they think is best. 

Wrapping up: I believe people attend the annual meeting as much to see and talk to their colleagues in informal settings as they do to attend the sessions. That is something that can't be duplicated online. I don't think SAA ever has to worry that someone who has the option of attending the meeting won't attend if these virtual options are in place. These options serve members who can't attend the meeting (or, actually even people who attend the meeting but can't be in more than one place at the same time). That said, it is possible to achieve some level of virutal comraderie, as people on Twitter have found. Again, I hope people in SAA begin to think about this not just as something they *have* to do because people are clamoring for it, but as something they *want* to provide because it will increase communication and information sharing among the profession. I have the impression that some are looking on all these opportunities with reluctance, and that concerns me. I hope I'm wrong. 

Again, thank you for asking for our opinions, and please let me know if you would like additional information. And again, sorry for any typos. It's taking me long enough to write this, so I'm not checking it over as carefully as I should. 

Kate 

1) Wifi. I'm hesitant about ranking which of the improvements is the most important because that makes me think it would allow for some options to fall of the list and I don't want to see that happen. As to cost, clearly it needs to be kept reasonable. What's reasonable? Ten dollars a day? Foty dollars for the whole conference? That might sound too steep to some. I'd hope it could be kept lower than that, but it seems reasonable to me. Would it be possible to get a sponsor to underwrite this, or would we prefer not to draw on them for yet another cost? Access to wifi might be more of a priority in hotels where the meeting rooms are below ground, and so pepole would not be able to rely on getting a signal on smart phones, etc. So that might be a factor in selecting which hotel to choose if wifi is not seen to be within our financial reach in either of them. Go for the one that's above groud. But that's assuming we cannot neogtiate for a reasonable wifi rate, and I am hoping that the world in general is moving toward this being a standard rathe than an exception. 

2) Virtual conferencing. These comments refer only to options for sessions and plenaries, not component group meetings. Personally, I do not think that being able have synchronous participation in live sessions should be a priority. In other words, I do not think we need to consider live-streaming session content so that people can view it and particpate by asking quetions or making comments. What I think would be most useful is to follow the model I've seen used by other organizations, of having a separate virtual confernece, tailored just to online participants. As I recall in this model there can be a few different tracks of sessions, in each session the speakers re-present to the virtual audience the content they presented at the live session, and the audience has the opportunity to share comments and questions with each other and with the speakers. I think I have also seen additional options for virtual networking sessions with the virtual participants, where people can just basically hang out and talk to each other. I don't know if it's possible to host a virtual exhibit hall for vendors, but that might be possible too (and perhaps a source of revenue).  That's my opinion. As to how sessions would be chosen for this, obviously the speakers would have to be willing to do it, so that might have to be another option to check on the speaker's form. Other than that, maybe people get to vote for which sessions they'd be most interested in attending virtually? Or SAA could pre-identify topical tracks, such as electronic records, diversity, new archivists' concerns, ethics, international programs, etc. It's my understanding that virtual conferncing can generate additional revneue, not just be an additional cost. In your future post on this topic I hope you will be able to address that issue based on your discussions with vendors providing these services. Is there anything else it would be helpful to know at this time? 

3) Recordings: I think all sessions and plenaries should be recorded following the current model (that is, recorded unless the speakers say they are not comfortable being recorded). Indivdual session recordings should be available for purchase as downloadable mp3 files at a cost of no more than $5 per session. You could look at options for bundling groups of sessions for purchase at a discounted rate. Ideally, recordings of plenaries should also be freely available for streaming on the SAA site (as video). Recordings should be available within two weeks of the meeting (that was one of your questions, wasn't it?) Another option is to be post the recordings and make them freely available through the Internet Archive. I think this option should be seriously considered for past meeting sessions (including all the previous annual meetings to do, for which we do have recordings). Like the content of the American Archvist, I think it's fair to charge for access to recent content, but then open up older content for free access. Again, why lock up content that's useful to the profession at large? I'm fine with charging for it for a certain period of time (and I'm fine with using iTunes as the host for that content, although others might not be). 

Is there a limit to the length of comments? I suspect there might be. I'll post 4 & 5 separately. And sorry for typos. I'm not taking time to proof this!  Kate 

First, thank you for posting this and asking for our feedback. I'll post separately about the specifics you're looking for, but I wanted to make a general point that may not have been discussed. In addition to benefitting SAA's members and non-members in the U.S., many of the kinds of changes you're discussing would make it possible for achivists outside the U.S. to gain access to the research being developed and shared here in our country. Facilitating the sharing of meeting content, through increased access to social media (wifi), online conference options and making it easier to buy recordings of sessions would all increase information sharing across borders and time zones. Doing so benefits not only those archivists who can't attend the meeting, but also those are presenting and SAA as a whole by increasing the reach of the annual meeting. 

Facilitating access would also make it easier for students and non-archives professionals to access materials that might otherwise be out of their reach. I mention this group because I suspect you may not get very many comments from people representing these groups. Increasing online access to SAA-produced content has the potential to benefit the profession as a whole and allow people in more diverse settings to share in what is arguably the best thinking the American archival profession has to offer. 

I understand why you want more specific feedback than this, and I hope I don't sidetrack the discussion, but I think it's important to remember that there are lager principles at stake here than just personal convenience.