In praise of webcasting

Arriving late to an auditorium already full to the brim, I was forced yesterday to watch Itiel Dror's presentation to the ALT-C 2008 conference in Leeds from a second room where a video feed was being streamed in using Elluminate.

Now I've seen Itiel speak a number of times, so my attention focused more on the effectiveness of the technology that was being used to deliver his presentation. My conclusion was that a live (or even a recorded) video feed of a presentation is almost as good as being at the event in person. I know you may not be able to engage in the Q&A (although that's possible) but then hardly anyone asks questions anyway. Hearing a speaker, which is the most you can expect from a typical webinar, is a good but very much second-best option. Seeing the speaker, including that all-essential body language, is as real as I need to feel I'm experiencing the real thing.

What doesn't work so well is turning the camera on the screen to show the slides. The quality is simply nowhere near as good as a direct download of the slides at a high resolution. My recommendation would be to split the speaker video and the slides into two feeds displayed side-by-side.

So, if all presentations were available, live or recorded, in this manner, would I still attend the conferences? Well, some I would, perhaps where the sessions were more interactive or the networking of real value. Others I'd miss out on. After all, I often find myself booked in for whole days when there's only one speaker I really want to hear. Would I pay for the privilege of seeing the webcasts? Now that's a difficult one.