Why Forbes CEO conference failed the media test

I’ve been to a lot of conferences over the years. Some good were good, and plenty were bad. But I’ve always had a single expectation that until today was fulfilled. The typical scenario for a member of the press reporting from a conference usually follows this pattern:

1. Turn up & register at the event.

2. Sit in the conference room, usually in a reserved section, and if you’re close enough, catch a few spittles from an over-excited speaker.

3. If you’re in the

   US

   , open your laptop and connect to Wi-Fi (that's still an unheard of scenario in

   Australia

   btw.)

4. Speeches end. Return to media room, attend Q&A for press, say G’day to a few journo mates, write story, go home.

What caught me – and a few of my colleagues, I might add - by surprise today was the twisted version of the norm at the Forbes CEO gig. It wasn’t good for me, and I suspect it won’t be good for Forbes in the long run.

First up, media rego was at a hotel 10 minutes walk up the road. After the identity check and photo session, we were escorted in a mini-bus and driven past the police roadblocks, through the concrete and wire barricades that have been holding back the protesters, and up to one of the less trafficked entrances at the Sydney Opera House.

Our passes were checked again on entering the Opera House, and we were led striaght to the media room. At that point I’m wondering why we're not actually going to the Concert Hall where the live event is about to start. Then it dawned on me that our reporting would be done via two plasma screens in the media room. I could be doing this back at my desk via a webcast!

So there we are, scribbling away at our tables. A sideshow for me was watching the Asian media guys actually filming the action on the plasma screens and recording the acoustic audio feed that’s being pumped into the room. That won’t be a pretty result.

Oh, and a quick scan of the room, and nope, no Intel or Wi-Fi signs (call it a weird hobby).

Forbes was however kind enough to hold a Q&A after the panel session I attended so that us poor tortured souls could have access to the speakers in real life. Imagine that.

So now I’m left with a lot of questions that need answers:

* Were these CEOs in the audience so precious that they can’t stand being in the same room as journos? Or are we that dangerous?

* Tickets were $A5000 per attendee. If I saved them the mini-bus rental and walked a few blocks, surely they could include Wi-Fi in the media room?

* Does this sort of thing happen at other Forbes CEO gigs around the world?

* Do the organisers appreciate the irony of a publisher - that prides itself on being a focal point of conversations – corralling other media into a room where they can’t actually participate in the main event?

* More than that: this treatment of media, and the implied exclusive, restricted access to CEOs was actually one of the main reasons why protesters were outside. People want leaders who are accessible, not locked away. (ok, so that’s a statement)

* Forbes publisher Rich Karlgaard went to some length to admonish the audience of CEOs for using their mobile/cell phones. Have they not heard about AlwaysOn? The future of conferences is one that promotes active, participatory audiences, not one that seeks to control and manipulate.

What’s the net effect of my rant? Forbes attempts at controlling the media created ill-will among me and my colleagues. Was that intended? I’d like to know.

Comments

[Trevor Cook]

They had wifi at Blogtalk Downunder in May in Sydney, only time I've seen it in Australia.

[Iain Ferguson]

Hi Mark. I remember covering a Forbes conference in Singapore for the Fin's Web site a few years ago..hacks were allowed into the conference venue itself no problem (albeit with fairly hefty security checks along the way).

Slightly strange that a media outlet itself would adopt such a controlling stance -- it would be interesting to find out to what extent your experience was a policy initiated by Forbes or requested by CEO delegates themselves.

[Brad Howarth]

Were there any journalists from Forbes in the media room with you? If not, I wonder where they were sitting ...?

[Flack'nHack]

I've worked the logistics of these conferences in the past, mainly one in Shanghai six or seven years ago when I was doing the PR support for one of the CEOs who attended -- and he was there this year too.

Typically, the Forbes Conference is about PR for Forbes and his publication -- all other considerations are secondary, including other media access.

Security has tightened up so I understand why they would be screened off but not why WiFi was not set-up. Here's what I suspect: local PR agency Weber Shandwick is not very tech orientated nowadays (does not even have a tech group so I hear), so probably they did not even think about it. Along with a bunch of other things, obviously.

As to why a media outlet would take such a controlling interest -- Christ guys are you that naive? The conference is a marketing exercise for Forbes, nothing more nothing less.

BTW: I am an ex-journo, so I've worked both sides of the fence, like Mark.

Later ....

[Mark Jones]

Flack'nHack: Indeed, it's no great secret that I worked in PR for about 18 months when I was fresh out of my PR and Journalism degree. At the time, I was also working for a community paper in suburban Sydney. As they say, I saw the light... ;)
Anyway, what's with the mysterious identity? That's very un-bloglike of you. And given your profession, not a good statement about accountability.

[Flack'nHack]

On my mysterious identity: knowing the agency side you'll know that we have clients, not readers, and thus a totaly different dynamic in terms of how much you can say (contracts include NDAs remember). My nome de plume means I can say what I like, while at the same time protecting clients and others, including editors (note I identify no one in my Blog).

On accountability: what accountability is there in the Blog space for personal opinions, rants and random thoughts? I am my source, except where I quote others, and my opinion are my opinions. This means I am accountable to me, last time I checked. Besides, accountability does not mean responsibility, just take a look at the hatchet job done on various people over time. We know who did it (the by lines I guess make them'accountable'), but no editor fell on his sword for being responsible.

All that said, I enjoy your Blog and others (Dvorak, Jon Udell, Michael Miller and Dan Gilmour especially).

Thanks for the discourse.

[Mark Jones]

F'nH: The reasons for hiding your identity were self-evident. The point I'm making is that there are plenty of bloggers out there who will tell you what they really think - Jupiter Media's Alan Meckler for example - and their credibility is enhanced because we know they are real people.
Btw, it's spelt Gillmor.
Cheers

[Brett]

Funny that I just came across this entry. Little over half an hour ago I interviewed Symantec President Gary Bloom and he said he was baffled by the extent of the security at the Sydney Forbes conference. It wasn't just the journos that were led around blind, the high profile guests/CEOs weren't able to find out where they would be eating on a given day, instead they were loaded on buses and sent to locations in secret. You have to worry about whats happened to little old Australia when American visitors are finding our security practices extreme!