On Skeptic Conferences – Part Three

This might be very well the last post for a while on the topic for a while -- again, some of the points here stem from the group for ‘Women for More Women at TAM8?, and from earlier posts ‘On Skeptic Conferences‘ and On Skeptic Conferences -- Part Two.

Whether or not such discussions will continue is up to several factors, which I guess is a problem all of us face when we are stretched for time, resources and so forth. I’m certainly finding some elements tending towards distressing and would prefer to have earlier posts that I’ve done on the matter say their piece, if you want any more detail:

• Ask Podblack -- Does Sex Sell Science? Some points may be very applicable in this case, so here’s some research on the matter.
• She’s Already Got Science -- Women, Skepticism And The Need For More Research -- one of the first posts about my efforts to look briefly at the history of not only non-profit, pro-women in science groups but what lessons we can learn as skeptically-minded people from the past;
• Why Dragon*Con? -- Why I choose Dragon*Con as a conference I contribute to, work at as a volunteer and encourage people to attend and present;
• Live Blogging At The ‘Where Do We Go From Here’ Panel At Dragon*Con -- what I heard and observed as an audience member when some of the ‘big names’ spoke about one of the most influential documents in recent skeptical history was discussed;
• Winter Of Research And Retention, Gender, Sex And Science -- I visit the issues of education and limited opportunities, as a researcher nearly a year ago now;
• Renewing Skeptical Organisations -- about the efforts of the European Skeptic organisations;
• On Stage And Off Stage -- Reflections On “Singled Out” -- I write about personal branding, labels, advertising oneself as a ‘skeptical woman’, some questions about my own views about ‘how women look when promoting skepticism’ and contradictions I’ve seen.

I found my short film of the last skeptical conference I went to as well -- if you head to 2.35min, you can see quite a bit of what I filmed.

Social networking like the Women-For-More-Women Facebook group, the Twitter contacts and emails I’ve received have reinforced my that there’s an interest beyond any stereotypical ‘cheerleading girls for the entertainment of the skeptic boys’. In fact, I think that there’s hurdles that well-established groups which promote minorities in science, technology, consumer rights advocacy, et al, have already faced, and I sincerely hope that skeptics do not think of themselves as ‘the only ones saying anything’. Tapping into those seems like a great ‘next step’ too.

A few more things I have noticed, however.

The Cost of Conferences (And All The Rest Of It) - this year I have a few friends who said that whilst they would love to go to x-conference (whether it was the Amazing Meeting, Dragon*Con, the upcoming NYC Skeptics conference called the Northeast Conference on Science and Skepticism or ‘NECSS’ -- do check it out!)… there just wasn’t the chance what with cost of travel, cost of staying in a place, et al. Some of these people were ‘regulars’ on the scene and it just wasn’t viable any more.

They were probably the most vocal ones or the ones best known to me, but I wouldn’t be surprised if there were less economically-advantaged people from a variety of backgrounds and diverse experiences who had a similar experience. Dr Kiki Sandford is one such person, as I’ll quote further on in this post.

I have noticed that Eugenie Scott has been interviewed in Science News -- ‘Accept it: Talk About Evolution Needs to Evolve’ says:

What should scientists and people who care about science do?

I’m calling on scientists to be citizens. American education is decentralized. Which means it’s politicized. To make a change … you have to be a citizen who pays attention to local elections and votes [for] the right people. You can’t just sit back and expect that the magnificence of science will reveal itself and everybody will … accept the science.

To me that indeed calls for more interaction and more responsibility for what’s getting out there on a variety of levels. But where and how?

I am then reminded of something that Daniel Loxton, of Junior Skeptic, said on Facebook:

Daniel Loxton wonders if the economy is having the effect of shaking skeptical organizations out of their old habits, and making it easier for them to get behind the new skepticism?

In case you are wondering (well, I was interested!), he defines ‘new skepticism’ as ‘Self-organizing, local, and independent grassroots activism, plus all the digital beeswax (podcasting and all that)’. Reed Esau, of SkeptiCamp fame, points out that his ‘big focus of the next iteration of SkeptiCamp is to build out wiki-based infrastructure to learn from our mistakes and successes in organizing the events’.

But first -- Dr Kiki Sandford has written over on the Skeptic Blog about ‘Fostering Communication Outside the Conference Box’:

I didn’t go to TAM this year. In fact, I’ve never been. Not that I didn’t want to attend, but I’ve recently made it a rule to only attend conferences where I have been invited to speak. Makes it much easier on my pocketbook, and I don’t end up regretting my decisions to not attend any of the bazillion conferences I could attend each year. But, why do I bring this up… the conference?

So, that’s another factor in a ‘minority not presenting’. She does present a somewhat-alternative:

…The social web is getting closer and closer to putting all of these pieces together, and I am constantly on the lookout for interesting projects that are on the verge of making science communication better. In my recent web jaunts I came across the Imagine Science Film Festival, which will take place in New York in October. I think this festival is starting in the right place… rather than just getting film-makers to submit films and holding a physical festival, the organizers have partnered with the well-known video sharing site, Vimeo. In doing so, they have enabled the submission process to become a social one. People can upload and comment on each others videos. And, the hope is that the films run the gamut from artistic to educational to fun. This brings together film-makers from all different backgrounds into one conversation about what science in film actually is or even what it can be.

You may notice that the Skeptic Zone podcast doesn’t shy away from podcasting lectures that we’ve done or presentations. There’s been a few of the Amazing Meeting shows that have been put up on YouTube, which is a great idea. I know that there’s recordings made at Dragon*Con too and I have found the following INVALUABLE - please check out the Dragon*Pod recordings, particularly if you are interested in getting into podcasting!

I personally caught a lot of the Science-Based Medicine conference that was broadcast live, as that was the one thing at TAM7 that I really would have enjoyed seeing live. Considering that Swoopy of Skepticality, MsInformation of Geologic Podcast, Dr Rachael Dunlop and a cast of enthusiastic others were enjoying the Live Streaming of the Talent Contest and ended up chatting throughout, I can certainly see the entertainment value too!

Yet there were also a few people with restricted bandwidth who couldn’t access the the show too. I couldn’t access chat, myself, my computer just crashed every time (maybe that’s just my computer though). I’m certain that future conferences may consider that aspect too.

In the comments of Dr Kiki’s blog-post, Reed of SkeptiCamp comments:

However, effective knowledge sharing is much more than posting a video, listening to a podcast or twittering. It’s about learning to communicate as well, being able to share ideas both at a cocktail party or presenting in front of a large audience. It’s about thinking on your feet, interacting with others, and knowing what to say and how to say it in real-time.

Will that sort of intimate interaction ever reach online? Perhaps, but until then we skeptics need to extract as much as possible from the means presently at our disposal.

That’s what the ‘SkeptiCamp’ effort is all about, an open conference format built on the wildly successful BarCamp format.

Being more than one ‘face’. Approaching on several fronts, taking charge in a variety of ways. Being authentic, rather than just ‘playing to the usual crowd’ or ‘to the fan-club’.

Tapping into local opportunities, seeking funding via alternative means such as scholarships, creating an identity and developing an authentic following as an ‘expert’… they all take effort. Branding oneself as much as a product does, as I said in earlier posts like On Stage And Off Stage -- Reflections On “Singled Out”.

What I do hope may happen is that people will find alternative ‘stages’, even though the ‘iconography’ of an Amazing Meeting presentation features highly in our views of ‘making it as a skeptic’. Maybe it requires a little more imagination, but certainly with further discussion, I’m sure it could be done. Let’s see if we have the energy to do so.

Tagged as: Australia, conferences, Facebook, feminism, gender, minorities, networking, Science, skeptic, skeptic conferences, skeptical women, Skepticism, social networking, twitter, women