4 December 2006
To WiFi or not to WiFi?
We’re busy putting the finishing touches to our plans for The Future of Web Apps in London in February. We’re having some discussion over the merits of providing WiFi to our attendees throughout the day.
There’s no argument that at an event aimed at web designers, developer and entrepreneurs there needs to be a stable, robust connection capable of holding hundreds of simultaneous connections. And with that in mind we have allocated a substantial chunk of our budget to paying a company to provide that. So there will be WiFi.
The debate we are having is whether to have the WiFi ‘on’ throughout the day or to switch it off during the presentations. We had some feedback from our San Francisco event back in September that indicated ‘always on’ WiFi is very distracting. Why? because attendees take their laptops into the auditorium and spend the time IM-ing their friends and answering e-mails instead of listening to the speaker.
You might argue that WiFi is needed for live-blogging. Well, not really because anyone who wants to blog can write their post off-line and post it at the break when the WiFi is back on.
You might say “hey we’re not children, we can make up our own minds whether to use it or not. Who do you think you are, Teach!” – okay maybe that wasn’t exactly what you were saying but you get the drift.
We don’t want to be Web Nazis but in our experience (two major conferences and over 20 workshops worldwide) people don’t regulate themselves. They spend all day performing pointless tasks online that could probably wait until the next day.
If we’re going to put our even-organisers hat on for a moment this presents a problem – because what we absolutely want is for everyone who attends the event to enjoy himself or herself, to learn stuff and to take something away from the day that they can use. We want everyone to feel like they got value for money. But if they’re messaging all day then the likelihood is that they won’t.
You can’t force people to listen but you can remove any distractions. So the question is: Is WiFi a distraction at conferences? Should we turn it off during the slides? What do you think?
Enjoy this article?
If you liked this article, feel free to re-tweet it to let others know. Thanks, we appreciate it :)
We love .net Magazine
We're big fans of .net so they've hooked us up with a rad deal: Save 50 percent on your subscription.
Wulf Forrester-Barker
# December 4, 2006 - 1:20 pm
How viable would it be to do both? Set aside an area with permanent wi-fi (some people are bound to feel that they need to be available for IMs from the office or to check out the sites mentioned and flag them up as the event is going on) but, for the majority of the space (particularly front and centre, where the presenters will be able to get most eye contact) leave it off during the sessions.
masukomi
# December 4, 2006 - 2:33 pm
I think the both suggestion is best, although I doubt it would be physically possible. Assuming it isn’t I would vote for turning it off during presentations.
Josh
# December 4, 2006 - 2:39 pm
What, no backchannel? Set up a public IRC channel for the attendees, and put a live feed of it on a secondary projector. That way you can see and react to the snark as required.
John Topley
# December 4, 2006 - 2:57 pm
I’d say switch it off. I’ve found it distracting at the Carson workshops I’ve attended, to the extent that I’ve been left wondering why people bothered to attend when they’d obviously rather be surfing the Web than listening to the speaker. Sometimes it was embarrassing actually, like watching people in a boring lesson back at school. If they desperately need to connect, then that’s what breaks are for.
There’s something about having a computer in front of you that makes you want to fiddle with it! That’s why I stopped bringing my laptop and now carry a paper notebook instead.
Patrick Griffiths
# December 4, 2006 - 3:39 pm
There *is* actually an argument to be had that an event for web peeps needs wi-fi. Although, as a conference organiser, I would lean towards providing it, I could argue the merits of not having it at all.
Both at FoWA in London earlier this year and at @media it was only a (vocal) minority of the audience that had laptops with them let alone used wi-fi. I expect it might be different in the USA.
From a conference *goers* perspective I think wi-fi at events is pretty crap – during presentations it’s distracting, and in between sessions it’s anti-social.
There’s as much to be said about switching it off in the breaks as there is about switching it off during the presentations (when it can be argued it’s more useful and although I’m with you on the live blogging thing, some would disagree – it’s not just about posting it whenever, it’s about providing real-time coverage – a live football match rather than a recorded one).
Chris
# December 4, 2006 - 3:55 pm
This is something that has bothered me as well. It doesn’t show any respect to the speaker who likely traveled and spent weeks preparing.
I attend Refresh events in Phoenix, and am seriously bugged by how many attendees use wifi (it’s held at a coffee house).
Oliver Zeisberger
# December 4, 2006 - 4:14 pm
I have been at the first Future of Web Apps in London last year. I really liked the idea to take my notes on my “Writeboard” – which certainly needed an online connection to quickly save the notes inbetween. I think it is a good thing to have WIFI on during the sessions – but surely the crowd has to learn to use it wisely during presentations! After all if presentations are really good, the crowd will listen closely anyway.
John Lein
# December 4, 2006 - 4:51 pm
If you have a few attenders that really want to live blog (re: Patrick’s last comment), you could always leave the WiFi on, but password-lock it during sessions, only giving out the password to those who specifically request it for live blogging. Not sure if that’s really a good idea though – might upset some.
I think I agree with turning off the WiFi during the sessions myself, though you’ll want to make sure to explain your reasoning for this at the beginning so (hopefully) nobody will get upset.
Having taught college courses in computer labs, I can attest that email checking listeners drain the speaker’s enthusiasm, and it’s really not appropriate.
Rob Smith, Blockquote
# December 4, 2006 - 10:46 pm
Hi Ryan,
I’d say switch it off and I’ll tell you why – the most important part of a conference are the speakers. By having it off and removing distractions you are not only engaging the audience better, you are also respecting the speakers position and showing how much you value their speech.
This will make them feel happier about their presentation, make people think up better questions for Q&As and generally mean they are more willing to come back to speak again.
Just my opinion of course.
Wick
# December 5, 2006 - 12:02 am
I attended the Bulletproof CSS conference in Boston & I noticed many people constructively browsing the Internet during Dan’s presentation — a lot of it was relevant to the discussion.
However, the constant IM keyboard chatter from a very few people in the room was distracting. I’d suggest blocking the common IM client ports, but keep the WiFi on.
Peter Cooper
# December 5, 2006 - 1:51 am
Turning off wi-fi during presentations may or may not work. Getting everyone’s attention is a great thing, but what about people who snuck out? There was one presentation at the first FoWA that was sending me to sleep (I forget which) so I went to the lobby and caught up on my e-mail (which I don’t like doing during presentations). There were at least 10 other people outside doing the same thing.
Also, I created an IRC backchannel at the first FoWA and it was pretty fun in the end. I’m not sure it’s entirely productive though. Some of the things that ‘happened’ during presentations were actually co-ordinated there. However, it’d be pretty easy for people to use Bonjour on their Macs and all talk to each other even without you providing the network, so…
In my heart I’m edging towards no wi-fi at these events.. but in my head, I say ‘yes’, because it was so useful, and it also helped me find other people in the crowd I was looking for(!) (there was plenty of “I’m in the 4th row from the back” going on)
It’s a real tough decision though, and I have every sympathy for it, given someone will moan one way or the other.
Michael T. Halligan
# December 5, 2006 - 3:15 am
Keep the wi-fi on, but shoot anybody using it while sitting on the stairs in the auditorium.. Or, just, anybody sitting on the stairs in the auditorium!
matt
# December 5, 2006 - 7:55 am
I like being able to visit sites that speakers refer to during their presentations, like when Kevin Rose was talking about Stamen’s work for Digg – his enthusiasm required that you check out the site immediately ;) Sure it can be disrespectful for people to surf and not listen, but who’s losing out for doing so in the end? Perhaps a verbal note at the beginning of the conference encouraging attendees to close their laptops is enough; only someone who truly needs to check up on something at that instant will do so. Or am I being too optimistic?
Ben Sauer
# December 5, 2006 - 10:07 am
“Sure it can be disrespectful for people to surf and not listen, but who’s losing out for doing so in the end?”
Not just the surfer.
I find it extremely distracting when someone is typing non-stop during a talk: its more so when there are entire rows doing it. The last time this happened was at d.construct in Brighton, which had a seperate area for those needing to work.
If you’re not interested in the talk, you shouldn’t be in the room!
Ryan
# December 6, 2006 - 12:58 am
I say no WiFi during the slides. I agree with you wholeheartedly. Although I’ve never sat in on a conference such as that, I’m aware (from relative situations) that people will pre-occupy themselves and miss what they paid for. And it’s more than just losing money – it’s all that quality content gone. The enjoyment comes from seeing it first hand, and interacting with it directly.
Craig
# December 6, 2006 - 1:53 pm
I think that turning off WiFi is a great idea. Although you may experience some backlash for doing so, I think everyone will learn more as a result. I was a student not all too long ago, and whenever there was an Internet connection during class – no one learned a thing. It’s just far too easy to spend your time checking sports scores or sending IMs to friends. And while people might claim that they wouldn’t act like this since they are paying to be there, I doubt that highly.
Megan
# December 7, 2006 - 12:33 am
I’m leaning towards switching it off, myself. Not to mention at Web Apps in San Fran, people became more pre-occupied (alright, obsessed) with checking their connection every five seconds than live-blogging the event.
Matt Lee
# December 7, 2006 - 12:54 am
I think I’d be pissed off if I couldn’t WiFi. Why not block non-port 80 traffic during talks if it’s a real problem? Looking relevant stuff up on the web is a useful thing when people talk about stuff, IMing your girlfriend is not.
Rick
# December 7, 2006 - 2:16 pm
I say turn it off. I find it distracting, as an attendee, when half the audience is doing busy work on their laptops. If someone is on emergency call, then they hopefully have SMS (on vibrate) and a wireless card (Sprint rocks!). And take it to the lobby! :)
Gill
# December 7, 2006 - 4:09 pm
As we’re in London right now with Eric Meyer – we asked him what his thoughts were on the ‘to wifi or not to wifi situation’. As it happens, he’s been considering this very issue for An Event Apart.
He suggested that we don’t turn the wifi off during the presentations but, politely, ask people to sit on the left if they are planning to blog/IM/type and on the right if they are planning to sit quietly and just listen.
I think that’s a good solution – everyone wins!
Dylan
# December 8, 2006 - 8:19 am
I’d suggest leaving it on, for the very reason that if all 800 attendees logon at exactly the same time, only during the breaks, then no one will get any connectivity at all due to the connection crush.
Ross Hill
# December 8, 2006 - 12:00 pm
Off! If people are going there to meet in person and listen to speakers in person they shouldn’t be online.
If you are going to have wifi, why not just webcast the whole thing from a studio? You can then have speakers from anywhere in the world, and those who want to surf can surf. Heck, why not just record sessions and sell video casts?
Tanny O'Haley
# December 8, 2006 - 7:26 pm
There have been studies that say reading email while trying to do something else actually reduces your IQ. I think this would reduce an attendee’s ability to pay attention to the presentation.
http://www.ericmackonline.com/ica/blogs/emonline.nsf/dx/e-mail-is-bad-for-your-brain
Not only that, but if the person next to me is busily browsing, IM-ing and making a lot of noise typing, their actions will distract me and prevent me from hearing the complete presentation. Even if they don’t type loudly the flashing of their monitor will distract their neighbors.
I like Eric Meyer’s idea of moving people who demand to “blog/IM/type” to a different area of the room. The one change I’d make is that those who “are planning to blog/IM/type” not sit to the left, but sit in the back of the room. That way their computers are behind me and out of sight, though there still is the noise.
Owen
# December 12, 2006 - 4:15 pm
How about a simple introduction movie before every presentation, much like in the movie theatres, that says: switch phones of during presentation/no smoking allowed/minimize IM/email/websurfing. Just a polite reminder to the house rules everyone already knows. It also makes a proper start of the presentation, gets everyones attention etc.
Bobbie
# February 23, 2007 - 7:40 pm
I can’t remember the last conference I went to that got WiFi right. That alone is a reason not to have WiFi at all, but I wonder if it’s really going to do much except annoy people.
Personally, I find it distracting as a speaker to watch people tapping away, but as an audience member it’s incredibly useful – especially when the day is a long one with lots of speakers, or you’re half-listening to a presentation that doesn’t do it for you (and in any multiday event there are going to be some of those). And there are going to be hundreds of paying audience members to one non-paying speaker.
One example of somebody who does it sort of successfully would be Apple, where at major announcements the general rule is that there is a press area with WiFi but the auditorium itself is a black hole without connectivity. If you need it desperately, you can go out and get it.
None of this, of course, will stop people from creating their own connections inside the auditorium. I tend to do my liveblogging over a 3G phone data connection, but then it’s part of my job and not everyone will want to pay for hours of access; and I noted at the iPhone announcement in January that Ryan Block had opened internet access via his machine for the Engadget crew.
However, if you’re running an event that lasts all day (not just an hour or so) I think not providing ANY kind of connectivity is a bit harsh and given that you’re talking to people in an industry focused on the internet, seems counter-intuitive.