I was challenged recently by someone who questioned why anyone would care about the Podcasters Across Borders conference.  The individual’s claims suggested that PAB is a small and insignificant player in the conference circuit, offers nothing unique and was too late to the social media conference circuit to be relevant.

“Besides,” this person added. “I can just listen to the sessions when they’re published.”

I loved the challenge to consider what makes PAB an incredible conference.  I’m sure others in the PAB community have their own thoughts.  (Feel free to share them in the comments to this post, or post your own thoughts)

SIZE MATTERS

One of the early hypotheses adopted for PAB is that the impact of an individual’s experience is inversely proportional to the number of people gathered.  That’s to say, the smaller the conference, the better the experience.  PAB is the only social media conference we know of that is structured around a small capacity.  This bakes in the possibility that everyone will have a chance to meet, if not connect with, everyone else at the conference.

PUTTING THE PROGRAM BACK INTO CONFERENCES

We’ve heard far too many people say that conference programs are meaningless to them so they spend their time in the hallways socializing.  We have nothing against socializing at conferences and believe that there should be ample time to do so built into the program (at PAB, we allocate 15 minutes of each hour to socializing).  Socializing, though, can happen anytime and anywhere — you don’t need a conference (fee or free) to bring people together to socialize.

Bob and I strongly believe that a worthwhile conference has a meaningful and engaging program.  We put most of our time and energy into making sure that each PAB has a program worthy of other people’s time, energy and money.

COMMON EXPERIENCE

PAB’s one-room, one-track program means that everyone who attends gets to experience the same speakers, same sessions and same ideas.  There are no difficult decisions to make on which sessions to sacrifice to be in the audience of a particular session.  Everyone can participate in the common conversation about program content throughout the weekend and after the conference wraps up.  The opinions and interpretations are all unique and that brings extraordinary value to the “one-tent” approach.

HOUSE GUESTS

Bob and I decided to craft the experience of PABsters being guests of a home.  This means we act as hosts, working hard to ensure that everyone is made to feel welcome.  We do the fussy stuff, operate the sound system, help speakers connect their equipment, introduce them and run the microphones around during the interactive part of the program.  Our guests can sit back, relax and enjoy the weekend.  Based on feedback from previous years, we enlisted the help of five people this year to serve as Ambassadors, making sure that PAB newcomers were made to feel welcome and that anyone looking lost, lonely or confused would be helped.

The couches and round tables helped, too.

RE-ENERGIZING LUNCH

In order to keep the program moving and to make sure that the community has the physical and cerebral energy to keep going during the Saturday afternoon, we’ve always made sure to provide a good lunch.  We’ve kept people at the conference site by offering a fantastic buffet each year.  Lunch includes options for the vegan and meat sets, and a great dessert table.

I’M ON A BOAT!

The annual boat cruise has been a highlight of the social part of the program.  Nothing brings people together like being out on scenic Lake Ontario for two hours.  For the last two years, we’ve included an open-mic on the main level of the two-storey boat.  Partners and family members of the PAB community are invited to join us on the boat cruise at no charge.

SECOND TIER

With the exception of PAB06 (our inaugural year), the PAB program has steered away from the basics of recording, publishing and distributing content.  We’ve worked hard to make sure the program offers opportunities for new media and social media enthusiasts and professionals to think differently about the tools and how to use them.  The hope is to challenge the community to do something new.

Newcomers are reminded that there’s a room full of people with podcasting experience and favourite tools and toys, all of whom are eager to share their ideas over a coffee or beer.  It’s not the equipment you use or how you use it, it’s what you want to communicate and how you communicate it that matters most.

MMMMONEY

Money was an unwelcome discussion topic for the first three years of PAB.  This was largely for two reasons.  First, making money from new media and social media should be an advantage, not a catalyst.  That is, producers should focus on doing something remarkable, then figure out if there are opportunities to make money.  Second, and more importantly, we believe that new media and social media were not at a mature enough state to have a meaningful conversation about money, monetization and business models until this year.  PAB09 was the first year in which money was programmed into the discussion — and the dialog was definitely productive and respectful.

CAMPFIRE DISCUSSIONS

I hadn’t considered this until Adam Gratrix mentioned it during his recent appearance on John Meadows’ On The Log podcast.  Adam pointed out that the original idea for PAB was to meet at a campground and to share ideas around a campfire.  The magic of PAB, according to Adam, is that the community has managed to transplant that campfire conversation from the outdoors to a conference room.

BEING THERE

We often hear from people who are thankful that we publish the content of each PAB as audio programs in the months following each conference.  We do this to help advance the conversation and provide added value for the community.  Anyone who believes they’re attending a conference by watching or listening to the verbatim content from the program is only cheating themselves.  It’s the experience of being present for the sessions, discussion and socializing that makes the conference a reality.

HAS ITS OWN PLACE

Among the feedback we received so far about PAB09 is the comment from one person that PAB is what this person had hoped Mesh would be.  That kind of feedback reinforces the value of PAB and makes it okay that Bob and I volunteer hundreds of hours each into planning and running each PAB conference.

Really, we never created PAB to compete with other conferences.  Our goal is to hold an annual conference that fills a void left by, even augments, the other conferences.

PAB IS ABOUT NOT SETTLING

It becomes comfortable planning PAB on a solid foundation each year.  With the exception of PAB06 (our first year and the most risky of all of them — just organizing a conference), we’ve been able to tweak and refine the conference approach each year and build on the previous year’s success.  When things become rhythmic and comfortable, people will settle.

PAB is about trying new things, exploring new ideas and making things more engaging.  PAB is about figuring what the limits are and how to get beyond them.  We must practice what we promote by constantly improving.  That’s why we made the decision to move PAB to Ottawa, and to shake things up a bit.  We’ll still work from the same foundation; it’s just time to test its strength.

While we may have conceived it and taken the reins PAB is a community event.  We value that the community trusts us with this event and providing direction.  Perhaps that’s the most unique component of PAB.

YOUR TURN

What makes PAB unique for you?

Oh yeah! We take a group photo each year. (photo: Bob Goyetche)

On Saturday morning, I delivered a presentation called Curiosity Thrilled the Cat.  It was part of the PAB09 speaking program and I used it as an opportunity to share the importance of curiosity in all things, particularly creativity, innovation and play — three of the most commonly heard terms among my community of friends, and social and new media enthusiasts.

As part of my session, I had the entire room participate in adopting a Curiosity Manifesto:

1. Asking one question is only the beginning.
2. Seek a greater understanding, not a solution.
3. A curious attitude will set you free.

I will be blogging about PAB09 in the coming days.

It has just been announced that Molson Rickard’s White is a silver sponsor of PAB09.  In addition to some money for the conference, they will be supplying the boat cruise with some free Rickard’s White.

This marks the first time PAB has had a taste associated with it.  Which means that you can enjoy PAB all year round and show your appreciation to Molson at the same time.

The PAB09 program begins tomorrow with a video workshop from 2:00-4:00pm, and the kick-off and keynote speech by Jowi Taylor at 8:00pm.  There’s still space so register and be a part of Canada’s premiere new media conference.

That photo makes me want to have a cold beer!

Hundreds of people gathered for a rally yesterday at Ottawa’s Lansdowne Park.  The catalyst for the rally was an unsolicited development proposal from a group called Lansdowne Live.  I’m sure the group behind the proposal want to believe they are acting in the best interest of Lansdowne Park and that the citizens of Ottawa are unjustified in their opposition of the plans.  Common sentiment is that Lansdowne Live is acting with its bank accounts in mind, negotiating a deal that would leave a 30-year-old site in the hands of the public right when it would be ready for its first major overhaul.

The real issue is that city council had initiated an international design competition which was suddenly and unexpectedly terminated by Lansdowne Live.  A small group of city representatives are in closed-door negotiations with Lansdowne Live and have already begun approaching the federal government to explore funding options for the project — all without public consultation.  The plans seem to be something of a moving target and what the public has seen does not look good.  This includes turning a quiet residential street into the primary access route for a major box-mall shopping development and theatre complex, reduced parking for increased business and residential, and the expansion of seating in a vacant football stadium that has housed two failed CFL franchises in the last 15 years.

Jean Pigott calls Lansdowne Park the Living Room of Ottawa.  It’s been a gathering place for more than 130 years.  It’s where rural and urban came together for the first time at the Agricultural Fair, where Ottawa’s first professional baseball team played and where troops gathered before being shipped overseas.  It’s 40-acres of public land next to the UNESCO World Heritage Rideau Canal.  Lansdowne Park is such a heritage site that when city council voted many years ago to tear down the Aberdeen Pavilion (also known as the Cattle Castle) and a city manager unilaterally overruled the council’s vote, he was praised by the city as a hero for having saved the heritage and spirit of Lansdowne and millions of dollars were invested into the restoration of the pavilion.

Basically, the City of Ottawa and Lansdowne Live are endorsing a closed-door, sole-sourced development project for a major piece of prime public property.  The same municipal government requires competitions for sidewalk construction.  This makes Lansdowne Live a city issue, not just an issue for Glebe and Ottawa South residents.  As one of the speakers at yesterday’s rally said, Lansdowne Live may be one of the best or perhaps the best option for developing Lansdowne Park.  However, without an open and competitive process that embraces public input, noone will ever know.

The press was out en mass for yesterday’s rally and CJOH news ran a piece about it.  If you pick up today’s Ottawa Citizen, Ottawa Sun or Metro you won’t know the rally took place.  There isn’t a single mention of the rally.  With all due respect to the Ottawa Citizen and Lanark County, I would consider this issue to be significantly more important (certainly more current) than the 50th anniversary of the Inferno in Lanark, the Citizen’s front-page story.  The rally did make front page news on 24 Hours.

Developer control of the city agenda is not really news here in Ottawa — at least, not for the last 30 years — nor is the absence of transparency or integrity in our elected officials.  However, a major issue like this escaping the papers is a bit unusual, particularly on a semi-slow news day.  Conspiracy theorist would suggest there’s developer advertising dollars at play.  I think the local newspapers have failed to live up to their responsibility.

For more information, follow Friends of Lansdowne Park.

The amazing schedule for PAB09 has been announced and can be seen (complete with times) on the PAB09 information page.

Here is a quick summary of the program:

Friday, June 19, 2009

• Make Your Camcorder Sing Like a Canary (Paul Lyzun)
• Keynote (Jowi Taylor)

Saturday, June 20, 2009

• What Have We Lost? (Bob Goyetche)
• JOLT! Now Here This! (Scarborough Dude)
• Curiosity Thrilled the Cat (Mark Blevis)
• JOLT! JUICE: Get Your Creative On (Tod Maffin)
• While You Weren’t Looking: From the Visibile to the Audible (Valerie Hunter)
• JOLT! Reach Out and Touch Someone (Daniele Rossi)
• Unkempt - The Creative Workflow of a Storyteller (Tim Coyne)
• JOLT! Podcasting Through the Side Door (Rob Lee)
• Why Monetization is Vital to New Media (Chris Penn)
• JOLT! Search Engines and Trust (Jay Moonah)
• A Good Picture is Worth a Thousand Words (Marko Kulik)
• JOLT! You Will Not F&*^#*g Talk About Me In Your Podcast (Tim Coyne)
• Develop Samurai Skillz to Help You Change the World (Rick Claus)
• JOLT! Are You Building or Are You Coasting? (Chris Brogan)

Sunday, June 21, 2009

• Pecha Kucha (community-organized)
• Spice Up Your Life: Creativity, Community and the Art of Masala Film-Making (Katherine Matthews)
• JOLT! Where Do You Want Your Content, Today? (Rick Claus)
• A Healthy Mistrust of Authority (Neil Gorman)
• JOLT! Alice in Podland (Yvonne Erlichman)
• We Are All Shanachies (Connie Crosby)

Have you registered for PAB09, yet?  If not, click here.

You can be excited by the way things will be or steadfastly attached to the way things have been. BookCamp TO was about embracing the potential of the book publishing industry and working towards a common understanding of the challenges that are being faced.

And it worked.  I believe the success of BookCamp TO was largely due to the energy people brought with them and Hugh McGuire’s brilliant kick-off speech in which he said that the goal of the event was “not to find solutions but to be equipped to ask better questions”.

Clearly BookCamp was long overdue. It was electrified as people who love books were given the opportunity to express their concerns about the current state and the future of the publishing industry to people who were similarly interested in hearing what was being said.

I find it interesting that the challenges being faced by the book publishing world are the same as or similar to the struggles faced by the music industry, radio, newspapers and now television. It seems to be a time of universal renewal.

There were three recurring themes that I found particularly interesting.

BRANDING

Noting that the market is strongest for personalities, most publishing houses invest their energy in promoting their authors (this is great if the author is a known entity). However, publishers are forgoing their own identity and personality.

This, of course, it not true of all publishing houses. Harlequin, O’Reilly and Oxford all serve specific niches for which there is an obvious branding opportunity (and one they’ve all worked very well). For generalist houses like Key Porter the opportunity for branding is not specifically obvious. This was the subject of an interesting and ongoing discussion. At one point I suggested that publishers need to do more to create their own brand and identity — promoting authors, particularly those that aren’t signed to a long-term deal, is gambling with the publicity budget. When Key Porter expressed concern about the idea of passing on a particular title because it doesn’t match with the house’s brand, Nathan Maharaj asked “what’s more important; brand equity or publishing a book?” Eden Spodek suggested that houses like Key Porter could focus on vertical niches within its catalog and build imprints with their own communities (e.g. Key Porter Cooks, Key Porter Travels, Key Porter Business…).

DESIGN

Books have always been as much about form as they are about content. Print publications allow publishers to control the form of the book and increase their impact through the visual experience. Of course, this is particularly true of textbooks, photography, business and children’s books. The move to electronic ink means rethinking the form and publisher control over it.

There are two types of electronic publishers: the gatekeepers of literature and culture; and, the curators of literature and culture.

Amazon’s Kindle (only available in the US) is a gatekeeper of literature. For the power of publisher control over form and design, the Kindle requires Digital Rights Management (DRM, something the music industry once required and is now abandoning) and Amazon decides what will be published on its platform. This means that individuals are not able to create their own books and make them available on the Kindle. It also means that the books you buy for the Kindle cannot be viewed using any other technology.

The OpenEBook.org project is working on an open standard for electronic books and readers. The standard uses coding which offers limited control of form by book publishers. This means that things like images and kerning have to be considered (or excluded) for the whole of electronic readers with their various screen sizes and resolutions. The advantage is that individuals and organizations (York University being one example discussed in the session) have the ability to make their works available electronically for all platforms including iPhones. BTW, Sony has embraced the open standard for electronic books (yes… the same company that created Betamax).

PROMOTION

Publishers have long depended on authors (and illustrators) to participate in the process of promoting their books. Until recently, most of that promotion was done through word of mouth and book tours. Now we have blogs, podcasts and social media networking sites such as Facebook, MySpace and Ning, and communications tools such as Twitter.

The problem is that the how and why to use the tools is too often an afterthought. Publicity departments think of these tools tactically, not strategically. They tell their authors without thought that they need to use everything and the kitchen sink. The result is disjointed and confused and becomes a nightmarish headache for the author to maintain. Furthermore, the author’s efforts may have nothing to do with the marketing strategy or worse, could work against it.

There also seems to be a misunderstanding of the tools. Someone said that it shouldn’t mean “you suck” if you can’t build a network of more than thirty people around your book to which Mitch Joel said quite bluntly, “yes, you suck”.

PARTING THOUGHTS

If we don’t breed young readers now, there will be noone interested in books no matter what form they’ll be available in twenty years from now. That’s why I read The Carrot Seed aloud to kick off my session on book, author and publisher promotion. The idea was to get people away from thinking “if you build it they will come” to understanding that “if you attend to it and nurture it no matter what people tell you, it will grow”.

BookCamp was invigorating and, I believe, just the beginning. The conversation needs to continue. Publishers need to work smarter and maybe a little harder to reshape what they do in the digital age; they need to think carefully about their own brand as well as the brands of the people they work with; they need to consider if they want brand equity or to just publish books; they need to understand the digital tools and why and how to use them; and, they need to look at the industries that have already dealt (or are currently dealing) with similar struggles in an effort to stay relevant and ensure their future.

There’s a lot to learn and an abundance of creative ways to keep the publishing ecosystem strong without dictating how the ecosystem will look and feel.

Before our two daughters were born, we were part of a book club.  More accurately, Andrea was in a book club and I attended the meetings with her (because the meetings were pot-luck meals of cuisine related to the theme or backdrop of the book).  It was during this time that Andrea told me in an impassioned way about shocking events I believed to involve friends of hers.  It turns out she was talking about characters in a book and the events she described, while unusual, came with such detail and resonated so much that it seemed hard to believe Andrea hadn’t observed all the activity first hand.

Books have the ability to involve readers in the story in a way that no other media can.  With the exception of storytelling, books are the original hot (and niche) media and remain strong to this day; whether fictional stories to which we can relate, non-fiction books that spread original ideas or children’s books that open young minds to amazing possibilities and creative ways of thinking.  It is this unique and important role they play that has made the discussion about books and their future a recurring theme of late and the subject of a growing number of conferences and forums including today’s BookCamp Toronto.

In my session, The Carrot Seed: A new model for book, author and publisher promotion, I will be exploring some of the creative ways books have been promoted and how communities have formed around books and their creators.  While the focus of my session is on ways to raise awareness of books, the underlying message of my session is that the publishing industry’s greatest challenge isn’t the technology through which books will be made available, but the continued development of talent that will attract new audiences, keep growing literacy levels and inspire readers of all backgrounds.  Without that foundation, the entire book industry will fall down.

My session draws on three assumptions (while there are more, I’m focusing on three):

• books have always been recommended by trust agents
• review space in traditional media is shrinking
• economics demands that publicists do more with less and book creators are now an integral part of the promotion strategy

I’ll be highlighting a number of promotional approaches that I feel are particularly interesting and I will share some dos and don’ts to help the publishing industry work with book bloggers and podcasters.

Here are some of the specific campaigns that I will reference in my session:

• The Graveyard Book and its video tour (Neil Gaiman)
• The Best Laid Plans (Terry Fallis)
• Pow! Right Between the Eyes (Andy Nulman)
• The Softwire (P. J. Haarsma)
• 30 Poets/30 Days (Greg Pincus)
• Rock Stars of Reading documentary series (Just One More Book!!)

The Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission (CRTC) released its decision on New Media, today.  The commission has decided to extend its exemption of New Media from regulations.

Relevant links:

• CRTC announcement
• Michael Geist’s analysis

The National Campus-Community Radio Conference is being hosted by CKUT in Montreal from June 7 through 13 and I’m pleased that I will be speaking in a session titled Campus/Community Radio, the Web and Media in the Digital Age at 12:00pm on Friday, June 12.  If you are planning on being at the conference and have any questions or thoughts for this session, please drop me a line.

I wonder if my old CHUO friends Tom Metuzals, Natalie Lalonde and George Regan will be on hand.

If the statistics are to be believed, the 18-24 demographic is a dying market for radio stations. This information can be spun and used in a variety of ways; and it has been by private radio which claims that the loss of that market segment means a loss in revenue and the beginning of the end of radio.

I’ve been thinking about this quite a bit, more so this weekend while I spoke at and attended the Radio Without Boundaries Conference in Toronto. My theories are still in development so I’m treating this entry as a way to better understand my thoughts and possibly hear from others who have their own ideas.

Let’s open with a tour I recently had of the Rogers radio facility in Ottawa. Four radio stations broadcast from the building:

• CHEZ 106 (Classic Rock)
• KISS FM (Top 40/CHR)
• Y105 (New Country)
• OLDIES 1310 (Oldies)

The tour took place at 7pm so the radio station was empty — even the studios. Well, not all of the studios. CHEZ 106 had on-air talent that evening in order to take phone calls for their 10pm music face-off. The other three stations were voice tracked.

If you’re unfamiliar with voice tracking, think of it as an iTunes playlist on the radio. Earlier that afternoon someone sequenced some music and ads, recorded the voice interjections and programmed the whole night into a computer. The studios were empty because the computers were playing that program; like a robot. In fact, Oldies 1310 uses voice tracking for the entire day with the exception of the morning drive (probably 3 or 4 hours out of a 24 hour day).

Let’s consider what that means. Overnight time slots were historically reserved for rookies to develop their talent during the hours that listenership was down. If the talent became good, they were considered for other timeslots — evening, midday, afternoon drive and eventually the coveted morning drive. It was like the farm system in a baseball organization; you start in the minor leagues and eventually work your way up as a starter in the majors. Overnight voice tracking means radio stations no longer have a farm system to develop talent. Who will replace the pros?

More importantly, how do you appeal to the younger audience? How does a radio station cater to the 18-24 market with a Program Director and a jockeys that grew up wearing bell bottoms (or perhaps pastel colours and thin leather ties) when they first became a fashion craze? Research? Ratings?

As near as I can tell, the 18-24 market is listening to their iPods because they can program what they want to hear. Why?

• They don’t have to hear the same songs every 90 minutes.
• They can hear more than 200 songs.
• They can use the shuffle mode and be surprised by which songs come up.
• They don’t have to listen to long commercial breaks.
• The person that’s programming their local station may not even live in the area so the programming decisions being made may not accurately reflect the interests of the area.

By picking formats that may be cost effective now, radio stations have established what I’ll call auto-obsolescence — as the people who grew up listening to radio when it was a significant player continue to… well… grow up, there’s very few people who will take their place as listeners. Radio isn’t going to die, it’ll just outgrow its purpose.

MAKE OLD NEW, AGAIN

I have this crazy idea. I don’t know if it would work. Certainly, some people I’ve shared it with think it’s too risky and wouldn’t be profitable. I’ll share it anyway.

What if one radio station in a particular metropolitan area replaced voice tracking with real people around the clock? What if that radio station expanded its playlist from 300 to 3000 (or more) songs? What if that radio station trusted its on-air talent enough to collaborate with programmers and make something fresh and exciting? What if that radio station thought of 18-24 year-olds as more than part of the CPM formula (to attract advertisers) and having a more important role at the station than just being interns that do the jobs nobody else wants to do?

I think those ideas could put personality back into radio. The novelty alone should make the radio station attractive to those who care about radio and intriguing to those who haven’t yet become interested in it. Advertisers might similarly be excited about being part of something out-of-the ordinary and might commit to be a part of the change.

The shift might buy the radio station six or twelve months of time to prove that this format could work. It could die miserably or it could eek out profit enough to continue. It could be wildly successful, marginalizing the competition and transforming radio in the process. It could put the soul back into private radio, something Paul Ingles claims was sucked out in full back in 1999.  Not that saving private radio is something people are lining up to do, though I do wonder if the death of private radio could have a cascading effect on all radio.

Public radio (which I love) suffers from different challenges and I’m still working on my thoughts about those. Thankfully, though, there appears to be a healthy group of 18-24 year-olds actively involved in public radio.