| Honestly, this sounds awful to me. 1. Invite-only increases the likelihood of an echo chamber, in my mind. I go to conferences to find out about things that arean't already on my radar. 2. This approach means only topics championed by those loud enough to speak up are discussed. There's no possibility for niche topics to get an airing if noone else knows anything about them since there's less likely to be a consensus to add them to the agenda. 3. One of the best aspects of attending a conference in my mind is the ability to combine it with a bit of tourism. I suppose that's a personal preference. 4. That's good for now, but when Google an The Knight Foundation stop supporting it, who's going to pay? 5. This is terrible. Work is for the week, weekends are my time and my work does not get to encroach on that. 6. Great, so at the end of the day, I can't even relax in the hotel room. So the next day, I'm wiped before we even start. |
They have a great approach to recommend inviting surprising and unexpected people. I don't work in publishing or journalism and have been twice, for example.
> 2. This approach means only topics championed by those loud enough to speak up are discussed.
Same is surely true of topics presented on stages. The organisers of Newsgeist make a serious effort to unearth unusual perspectives, partly through the invite-list. Last year I debated themes with an Icelandic politician, an NYT journalist and Jimmy Wales - there's no consensus from specialism occurring there.
>4. That's good for now, but when Google an The Knight Foundation stop supporting it, who's going to pay?
Great question of course, this approach falls apart.
> 5. This is terrible. Work is for the week, weekends are my time and my work does not get to encroach on that.
To attract a mix of industry leaders the mix of weekday / weekend days is a pragmatic choice.
> 6. Great, so at the end of the day, I can't even relax in the hotel room. So the next day, I'm wiped before we even start.
It's all voluntary of course! And fascinating to observe if not participating. There are plenty of early birds who skip the late hours, or meet up for jogging at 6am.
> Honestly, this sounds awful to me.
The events can be very intense and tiring in the short term. That's because real things are happening, difficult issues are actually being resolved, voices are listened to and progress gets made. Ultimately they are seriously energising, and not for people who sit at the back or like to take time off for sightseeing.