On the heels of the UK Libel Laws Incident (UKLLI), I just saw this posting about blogging conferences. Apparently the conference wasn’t necessarily cool with this idea. What is thought about blogging conferences?
I will write more when possible.
Cheers,
I think he has it about right. Blogging conferences is a valuable way of increasing the impact, reach and usefulness of the conference. It is something that is here and is not going to go away. Conference organisers need to manage it but it is foolish to try and strangle it.
I’m not quite clear on the reasons for CSHL’s pronouncement. Something about keeping bloggers to the same rules that journalists have to follow? I sort of see where they’re coming from but it still doesn’t make sense.
There are some pretty good posts and comments about that incident – by the blogger himself and some other people. I was reading a couple of them yesterday.
It’s an interesting question, and doubtless one that will run and run as the boundaries between journalism and communication get ever-blurrier.
BTW, the CSH incident seems to have been triggered by a scientist live-blogging and tweeting from a “closed” conference, and GeneWeb complaining to the organisers that the rules were not fair because they (GeneWeb) could not do the same as the scientist was doing. “Complain” is perhaps putting it a bit strongly, as from these posts I was reading yesterday, they all seem to be being remarkably civilised about it.
The libel issue in the U.S. is spreading to tweets too.
And here is the response from the company.