BlogHmmm

I noticed that Dave Winer was floating around on Day One of BlogHer, and guess I should have expected that his post about his experience there would made me cringe. Jeneane Sessum nails it:

[from Dave Does BlogHer]

Parts of this post made me want to drive my car over a cliff too.

Jeneane, who did not make the conference, is playing with the Thelma and Louise imagery Dave used in his post. And the cringing?

[from Some Post-Blogher thoughts]

Some adjectives: They were good-natured, friendly, flirty, exceptionally beautiful, smiling, and glad to see guys like me there.

They are beautiful babes, but not like like booth bimbos, more like Thelma and Louise. So you got a great ratio, and they're smart and driven, but that's not all -- they're also bloggers!

Yikes! I think commenting on how beautiful the attendees at any conference are -- BlogHer or other -- is wrong-headed. Dave sounds like someone pitching spring break at a particular resort.

But, unlike Dave, while I was struck by the closeknit feel of the conference, and yes, it was full of women, I didn't have any particular sense that the women were excited to have men there, per se, although I felt welcomed.

I was pulled off for a protracted and unplanned breakfast meeting Saturday, so I was unable to get back to the conference for Day Two, but based on Day One, I have some very different thoughts to offer:

• It was the first time I ever got condom and artificial sweeter samples as schwag at a tech conference.
• I saw a lot of people I knew, but compared to other conferences I attended this year, BlogHer was very clique-y. The mommy bloggers all got together and chatted, and in another corner all the knitting bloggers congregated, and so on. Note: I was one of the 20 or so Hims at BlogHer, but ... Maybe if there were more tech bloggers there I would have had a natural group to get together with. I noticed that none of the half-a-dozen birds of a feather sessions was dedicated to tech.
• The level of the workshops I sat in on Friday was very elementary, but that is consistent with other blog conferences. In fact, that is one of the reasons I had decided to skip blog conferences, in general.
• The women-in-solidarity ambiance was very strong, and I did at times feel like a delivery guy at a women-only health club. I didn't hear the vibe that Winer talked about -- the male conspiracy holding women back -- but at the same time maybe I just don't share enough of the unstated assumptions about women blogging that underlie the conference.

The last point may deserve some expansion. I dropped out of an AMA blogging seminar series when the unspoken goals of the attendees -- mostly PR and communications professionals -- started to wear me down. The goals were to determine how to do the least to accomodate blogging in the world of PR and communications. And that annoyed me to the point where I had to drop out.

I am not suggesting that women are trying to do the least they can to blog. But I feel that the goals and assumptions underlying BlogHer to some extent run against my beliefs -- or maybe hopes? -- of what's happening in the blogosphere.

It's hard for me -- as a white, old-school liberal -- to admit that I was subtly bothered by the undercurrents at BlogHer when I morally believe that those groups who are excluded from full participation in society should be able to join together for solidarity and mutual support. Or maybe its just that want to believe that the world of blogging is more egalitarian and gender-blind than the larger world. I would probably have felt the same unease at a Black bloggers conference, or one oriented toward teenagers, or Gays and Lesbians. Not that I wasn't welcome -- because I felt welcomed -- but that I wasn't involved in the core agenda on a personal level, only as a on-looker.

So while I celebrate the event, and praise all involved, I will continue to seek conferences like Reboot, where the number of participating women is extremely high, and all involved -- including me -- share core principles and purpose.

In the final analysis, what I have written may be more of a reflection on me (and maybe not even a very flattering one) than any sort of grand insight about BlogHer.

tags: blogher, jeneane+sessum, dave+winer

Comments

[GraceD]

Stowe, come back to BlogHer next year and hang out with me as I do not think of the men present as the delivery guys, but as my brother-in-solidarity.

All the best,
Grace Davis

[jeneane]

Thanks for your observations, Stowe. I think you hit on some important points. Especially important because yours, for me, is the perspective of a male and tech compatriot whose instincts I trust.

I also think that from the coverage of Day 1 I saw remotely (I MISSED YOU AGAIN--AAAHH!) versus the live chat sessions that we got to "listen in on" on Saturday thanks to Denise filling us in on the action, it was almost like two different conferences. Friday seemed lightweight and meet-and-greetish, with Saturday being the real meat of the conference.

They tackled some heavy topics in the sessions I saw on the chat--some globally relevant, some tearfully personal. I wish we could have had more folks chatting from the sessions, but maybe next time.

So, all I'm saying is that it might not have seemed as beginner-focused or cliquish on Saturday, but I can't say for sure.

As for the condom and sweetener.... uh... two great tastes that... never mind. I dunno.

[Toby]

Stowe - You are one of the smartest guys in this industry that I know. To me your role in this space is that of a visionary and sometimes visionaries don't have time or inclination to get down and dirty in the trenches with the people who are at stage one.

This was not a 'tech conference' although tech concepts were discussed. It was not a 'user' conference although most attendees were users. It was a time for people (be it mostly women) to in true blog fashion to discuss, debate, learn and support as we explored the next phase of blogging that makes sense on an indivdual basis.

If you had been able to attend Day 2 you would have found more intellectual and next generation discussion. Perhaps you would have had an opportunity to talk with women who are putting processes in place for people "who are excluded from full participation in society" to take advantage of social media. Perhaps you might have had the chance to talk with Dina Mehata or Evelyn Rodriguez or Amy Gaharan who are workign hard to make that happen.

Well, there's always BlogHer 2007 ...

[Jory Des Jardins]

Stowe, I'm disappointed by your disappointment. I didn't want to reply to this, because I think it's critical that we allow anyone who attended BlogHer to say whatever they want to say about it. We need the feedback for next year. But this isn't the usual high-standard-Stowe analysis I've come to expect from you. For several reasons:

1. You spoke about things that were missing that you didn't bother to stick around for. You weren't there on Day Two, which I suspect would have been more up your alley. Thanks to Toby and Jeneane who offer up in the comments some of what you missed. I'm sorry the Day One sessions were too rudimentary for you. We will look at the content. Please also consider you've been making your living as a blog consultant, unlike many of the women who attended the Day One sessions to learn techniques. When you asked me for a comped pass to BlogHer in order to review it, I expected a full review, not a partial one in which you rely on sources who were not even at the event to make your decision for you.

2. The cliquiness issue. This is entirely subjective, so I won't argue this one. But C'mon Stowe...Not everyone knows you at a conference. It happens. Dave and Robert seemed to get over it.

3. Relying on sources who were not accurate. Shelley and Tara were not even there, so shame on you for offering them up as premium sources in your other post on Blogher. And then you rely on someone like Melinda Casino, who has her facts wrong. I invite you to see Lisa's post--she at least points out Melinda's inaccuracies with far more restraint than I could provide: http://surfette.typepad.com/surfette/2006/08/blogher_06_for_.html.

Again, Stowe Dis-A-Point-Ing.

[Stowe Boyd]

Jory - It wasn't an truly analytical piece, but more an emotional one, so the subjectiveness was intentional. I wasn't really tlaking aboiut things that were missing, I don't think. And, as I said, the rudimantery nature of day one is something I have consistently seen in all blog conferences. In this post, I only quoted Dave Winer and Jeneane so the reference to Melinda, Shelley and Tara must be to the later post I made. In this one, I basically expressed my personal ambivalence about attending a conference where I don't share enough of the core principles of the group: it just happened to be BlogHer where it finally dawned on me that I just shouldn't attend those conferences.

[Stowe Boyd]

Grace - I don't think I will go back (see comment above to Jory), but I hope to meet you somewhere!

Toby - I did in fact talk with Evelyn at the cocktail party -- was the high point of my day. But I was really reflecting on the tone and focus of the conference, not the personal conversations happening in the breaks.

Jeneane - I was really looking forward to seeing you, alas.

[Shannon]

I love how you modify "condoms and artificial sweetener" with "at a tech conference," suggesting that you have gotten those items as schwag at some other kind of conference (which kind I shudder to think.)
I don't know that I care to think of myself as a woman blogger, any more than Elizabeth Bishop thought of herself as a woman poet. The noun is enough.
But, you know, not that there's anything wrong with that.

[Stowe Boyd]

Shannon - "The noun is enough." Nicely put.