Cons and Programming
Why don't con panels work? Or, more importantly, why do they work and why don't cons facilitate them working? I'm starting to think I'm just in the minority in what I like at panels, but more and more lately (probably as I spend more time at cons and see more) I'm getting a bored, been-there-done-that feeling with panels at cons. Things don't seem fresh. The topics are the same, the people are the same, and I'm starting to find that I'd rather do other things with my time. Perhaps this is why so many cons have a contingent of people who come just for the parties - why go to panels when you've seen them before? So what's the problem with panels? Why are they uninteresting? I think there are a few reasons:
The panel topics all seem the same. A lot of this has to do with conventions being genre-related. The topic pool is already limited by the convention's focus. Then the topic pool is further limited by the crowd attracted by the main guest(s), the knowledge of the panelists, the breadth and depth of knowledge of the panel coordinator, and what the con attendees want to see. Most panel coordinators work off a list of panels from the convention's previous years and attendee and panelist suggestions.
Panels are ill-defined. There's a strange phenomenon, especially at sci-fi cons, to freshen up the same-old panel topics by giving them clever jokey names. I've found that this really only confuses the issue even further because people can't look at a schedule and know what a panel is about, so they're left guessing what the writer really meant or going back and forth to the panel description. However the panel description can be part of the problem as well. When it's written by the programming department it can be vague and nondescript, making all the panelists wonder what they're supposed to talk about. On the other hand it can also be too specific, which is dangerous when it's not written by the panelists because they may not know, or be able to get to, all the specifics, misleading the audience and making them feel unsatisfied with the panel because it wasn't what was promised.
Panelists have a repertoire. Even the most knowledgeable panelist invokes a "been there, done that" feeling when they've been doing the same panel for years at the same con or region of cons. There's only so much a person can say about a topic, even when they're the premiere expert on the subject (and, let's face it, most of the people paying to give panels at sci-fi cons *aren't*, myself included). Getting the same person to do the same thing, or even rotating between the same two or three people, leads to a stagnation of information and ideas.
Panelists are unprepared. There's lots of reasons for this. I think the primary one is that they're assigned to a panel by a programming head. This often combines with "clever name" and "vague description" to lead to the great panel introductions that go "My name is Bob and I'm not sure why I'm here . . ." Every time I hear that I want to walk out of a panel, because, really, if you're not sure why you're here why should I waste my time? There can also be the problems of panelists being unprepared because the schedules are made at the last minute so panelists don't have time to prepare, or don't have time to work together.
A closely-related topic is that moderators aren't prepared or are nonexistant. A panel of disparate people who know something about a topic but don't know each other need someone to guide and direct the conversation. This person can introduce the panelists (stating why people are panelists is a great way to get over "I dunno why I'm here"), come up with questions, and make sure that the topics listed in the description are covered by the group. Oftentimes, though, a panel doesn't have a moderator assigned so the panelists stumble around until they get a common enough topic that they can talk about for the time period, even if it's not entirely with the topic description, what the audience wants to hear, or coherent. Other times the moderator doesn't know they're the moderator, either because they didn't pay attention or they weren't informed. There's also the issue of moderators not knowing what to do to prepare or moderate. I've been guilty of this one myself. There's not a lot of information on what makes a good moderator online, and what is there is mostly about calming fights and discussion issues, not preparation. Con Programming heads don't spend a lot of time fixing this issue, either, leaving moderators to sink or swim.
Panelists don't work together. I'm not talking about fights, because there are few cons that try to put together panelists that hate each other or have a known history. However, there are panelists who don't know each other or their backgrounds and experiences. Without a strong moderator there can be a period of getting to know each other that takes away from the time the panelists could spend discussing the topic. There can also be the problem of creating a debate topic where all the panelists are on one side of the issue and can't really explore the counterpoints, or where debaters are on opposite sides but can't argue coherently and calmly with other people and make the audience uncomfortable. Or, on the opposite side, the panelists are so smug and condescending to the other side that they make the audience either smug that they are right or angry because they're being insulted for having a view that the con advertised as legit. Personality conflicts can also manifest in panels as conflicts of energy, where one panelist dominates the discussion because they are quick to answer while others are more shy or polite and aren't given an equal opportunity. Or, alternately, a problem I've run into recently is cons refusing to give me a panel alone, so I prepare a panel that I've got experience and knowledge in as if it was my panel and I show up to find that there's someone else on the topic. It's hard in that situation to deviate from the plan I've had and integrate that other person in the plan, so I'm running over them just because I'm more prepared.
Okay, so there's lots of problems. What should be done about it? Personally, I think that cons should work on a variety of types of panels so that they're not counting on one kind to work all the time. Sci-Fi cons and Anime cons both do this. In Sci-Fi cons they've always done panels by coming up with a topic, finding people to talk about it, assigning one of them to be a moderator, and giving them a space to talk. In Anime cons they've always done panels by putting up a box on the website for panelists to create a panel name and description and submit it for approval. Both of these are great ways to get panels, but they shouldn't be the only way. Cons should have a variety of panels. Here's a list of ways to create panels that I think should be considered in every con programming attempt:
~Put up a submissions system. Let panelists submit a topic they can talk on, complete with a topic name and program description and maybe even a topic outline. Let them submit alone or gather a group of their own making and submit together.
~Make a core team of moderators. Make a list of interesting topics and find people who are acquainted with the topic but not experts. Get them together, either in person or online, and teach them. Detail extensively to them what their job is, how to prepare for their panel, and how to be a moderator. Force them to research the topic to find good questions, write the panel description so they know what the major thrust of the questioning will attempt to accomplish (a reason why non-experts are good, they know what they found interesting in their research and what should be detailed more), and have them find panelists who they think have something to contribute. You can even have them contact panelists with the questions a week-ish out so they have time to prepare.
~Ask a knowledgeable individual to give an individual speech or presentation on the topic. Let them write the description of what they'll be talking about.
~Create a group of people to talk about something rather vague and entertaining or informative in an informal setting and see where they go.
~Set up a formal debate. Find a topic that can be polarized and define the sides, get a speaker or two that feel strongly about both sides (or three or four, why limit?), set up introductory arguments, a series of questions for debaters to answer, and closing arguments with time limits. Get a personality to moderate who can keep the debaters calm and on topic while being fair and even.
~Set up round room discussions. This is one that I think is highly under-used in fan cons. Take a topic and get five or six people who know about it. Set them up in a room where each of them have their own area and let the audience rotate to hear the people they want to hear talk about the topic. This can be formal, such as "10 minutes at each station", or it can be informal and people can move when they wish. This is especially good for how-to topics such as crafting demonstrations where each station can be doing a different technique that accomplishes the goal (like makeup or dying) or other techniques such as writers and worldbuilding or getting started where individuals can have a lot of questions that are short and probably won't be asked in a more formal setting.
~Have an individual question-and-answer session for a person or group of people on a related topic. Instead of having a moderator come up with questions have an audience who knows they're supposed to come with questions about the topic, and have interesting guests they'll want to hear talk. Worried that you won't get enough questions? Create a list of backups, both formal and informal. Ask for submissions on the website, twitter, facebook for the con after the panel has been announced. If you're really worried find a website/blog/forum/lj/whatever for the topic or guest and ask them to come up with your backup questions (or, heck, all the questions, make it a gimmick "Bob's Twitter Q&A"). Bonus if you can record or transcribe the answers for the online helpers afterward.
~Create a game show. I don't know why more sci-fi cons don't do this (except maybe work and/or tech). A panel with the same people and the same topics could be made more exciting if the questions were chosen by the panelists from a jeopardy board and they were given 3 minutes to talk on the question they chose at random.
~Have a roast/tribute. Get knowledgeable people to talk about the guest of honor, how they are influenced by them/their work, how they first encountered it, and personal stories and anecdotes about their relationships. Can go together with a GOH speech to make it less pressure on the guest to speak for an entire hour. Can also work for non-guests, such as deceased people, favorite characters, popular series, etc.
~Create variety in showings. This is another area of programming that seems really stagnant: we pick shows from a formula to get variety then stick them in a small room and hope people go. In the age of amazon, torrent, and netflix it's not really working like it did when it was conceptualized. Showings could benefit from an injection of programming variety. Programming can schedule a showing with a following panel analyzing the themes in the show, how it varies from written work, plot its history, or talk about other shows like it. A group of funny people can be collected to do an MST3K-ish showing presentation. A variety of experts (say, a writer, a costumer, an actor, etc) can be collected to talk about what this particular show can teach people in their field.
~Set up some kind of topic-specific social hour. Cons are huge and meeting people can be a problem, especially people who share more niche interests within the larger con scheme. Not everyone can do late night drinking parties for various reasons (night, crowding, alcoholic, mobility, etc). Giving daytime and afternoon socialization opportunities maximizes the integration of new people into your convention.
Other things cons can do? Vary the people. I would love to see a con have a set policy of each year getting 10% of speakers as people who've never done a panel at the con, and 30% of presenters every year are retired for a year. As long as everyone rotates through who is retiring, even the popular people, it gives panelists a rest/fun year while keeping the panelist pool larger and constantly stirred. You can also rotate panelists into the moderator pool, making them the questioners and not the talkers to pull them out of their comfort zone. I know it's a hot topic, but I also really like DragonCon's track system. Dedicating a room and a staffer to a topic distributes the load, makes it easier for fans to find the panels on that topic, and helps to ensure variety in topics. It also creates a smaller community within a con that helps fans to find people who are interested in the subsets of the con's subject that attract fans. Even if the tracks are not as formal or public as DragonCon they can still be used internally by programming to make sure the topics are varied and similar items are not programmed opposite each other. You should also be sure to make a variety of seriousness, from goofing panels to entertainment panels to history panel, informative panels, how-to panels, and demonstrations within each topic area. There should be a variety of formalities, from informal people making fun to a highly structured debate. Different things appeal to different people (or even the same people, people like variety) and having a variety keeps people coming back.
Why don't cons do this now? Because it's work, and cons are run by volunteers with real lives. I get that. I think, though, that a lot of this is stagnation of the "this is how it's done" variety where no one has suggested there is any alternative. Maybe by just suggesting that things could be different people will stop doing the same-old and attempt to make programming better. Even better, by creating such disparate kinds of panels programming will stop putting all its eggs in one basket and even if an individual flakes on a panel and is not prepared there are plenty of other kinds of panels to go around.
The panel topics all seem the same. A lot of this has to do with conventions being genre-related. The topic pool is already limited by the convention's focus. Then the topic pool is further limited by the crowd attracted by the main guest(s), the knowledge of the panelists, the breadth and depth of knowledge of the panel coordinator, and what the con attendees want to see. Most panel coordinators work off a list of panels from the convention's previous years and attendee and panelist suggestions.
Panels are ill-defined. There's a strange phenomenon, especially at sci-fi cons, to freshen up the same-old panel topics by giving them clever jokey names. I've found that this really only confuses the issue even further because people can't look at a schedule and know what a panel is about, so they're left guessing what the writer really meant or going back and forth to the panel description. However the panel description can be part of the problem as well. When it's written by the programming department it can be vague and nondescript, making all the panelists wonder what they're supposed to talk about. On the other hand it can also be too specific, which is dangerous when it's not written by the panelists because they may not know, or be able to get to, all the specifics, misleading the audience and making them feel unsatisfied with the panel because it wasn't what was promised.
Panelists have a repertoire. Even the most knowledgeable panelist invokes a "been there, done that" feeling when they've been doing the same panel for years at the same con or region of cons. There's only so much a person can say about a topic, even when they're the premiere expert on the subject (and, let's face it, most of the people paying to give panels at sci-fi cons *aren't*, myself included). Getting the same person to do the same thing, or even rotating between the same two or three people, leads to a stagnation of information and ideas.
Panelists are unprepared. There's lots of reasons for this. I think the primary one is that they're assigned to a panel by a programming head. This often combines with "clever name" and "vague description" to lead to the great panel introductions that go "My name is Bob and I'm not sure why I'm here . . ." Every time I hear that I want to walk out of a panel, because, really, if you're not sure why you're here why should I waste my time? There can also be the problems of panelists being unprepared because the schedules are made at the last minute so panelists don't have time to prepare, or don't have time to work together.
A closely-related topic is that moderators aren't prepared or are nonexistant. A panel of disparate people who know something about a topic but don't know each other need someone to guide and direct the conversation. This person can introduce the panelists (stating why people are panelists is a great way to get over "I dunno why I'm here"), come up with questions, and make sure that the topics listed in the description are covered by the group. Oftentimes, though, a panel doesn't have a moderator assigned so the panelists stumble around until they get a common enough topic that they can talk about for the time period, even if it's not entirely with the topic description, what the audience wants to hear, or coherent. Other times the moderator doesn't know they're the moderator, either because they didn't pay attention or they weren't informed. There's also the issue of moderators not knowing what to do to prepare or moderate. I've been guilty of this one myself. There's not a lot of information on what makes a good moderator online, and what is there is mostly about calming fights and discussion issues, not preparation. Con Programming heads don't spend a lot of time fixing this issue, either, leaving moderators to sink or swim.
Panelists don't work together. I'm not talking about fights, because there are few cons that try to put together panelists that hate each other or have a known history. However, there are panelists who don't know each other or their backgrounds and experiences. Without a strong moderator there can be a period of getting to know each other that takes away from the time the panelists could spend discussing the topic. There can also be the problem of creating a debate topic where all the panelists are on one side of the issue and can't really explore the counterpoints, or where debaters are on opposite sides but can't argue coherently and calmly with other people and make the audience uncomfortable. Or, on the opposite side, the panelists are so smug and condescending to the other side that they make the audience either smug that they are right or angry because they're being insulted for having a view that the con advertised as legit. Personality conflicts can also manifest in panels as conflicts of energy, where one panelist dominates the discussion because they are quick to answer while others are more shy or polite and aren't given an equal opportunity. Or, alternately, a problem I've run into recently is cons refusing to give me a panel alone, so I prepare a panel that I've got experience and knowledge in as if it was my panel and I show up to find that there's someone else on the topic. It's hard in that situation to deviate from the plan I've had and integrate that other person in the plan, so I'm running over them just because I'm more prepared.
Okay, so there's lots of problems. What should be done about it? Personally, I think that cons should work on a variety of types of panels so that they're not counting on one kind to work all the time. Sci-Fi cons and Anime cons both do this. In Sci-Fi cons they've always done panels by coming up with a topic, finding people to talk about it, assigning one of them to be a moderator, and giving them a space to talk. In Anime cons they've always done panels by putting up a box on the website for panelists to create a panel name and description and submit it for approval. Both of these are great ways to get panels, but they shouldn't be the only way. Cons should have a variety of panels. Here's a list of ways to create panels that I think should be considered in every con programming attempt:
~Put up a submissions system. Let panelists submit a topic they can talk on, complete with a topic name and program description and maybe even a topic outline. Let them submit alone or gather a group of their own making and submit together.
~Make a core team of moderators. Make a list of interesting topics and find people who are acquainted with the topic but not experts. Get them together, either in person or online, and teach them. Detail extensively to them what their job is, how to prepare for their panel, and how to be a moderator. Force them to research the topic to find good questions, write the panel description so they know what the major thrust of the questioning will attempt to accomplish (a reason why non-experts are good, they know what they found interesting in their research and what should be detailed more), and have them find panelists who they think have something to contribute. You can even have them contact panelists with the questions a week-ish out so they have time to prepare.
~Ask a knowledgeable individual to give an individual speech or presentation on the topic. Let them write the description of what they'll be talking about.
~Create a group of people to talk about something rather vague and entertaining or informative in an informal setting and see where they go.
~Set up a formal debate. Find a topic that can be polarized and define the sides, get a speaker or two that feel strongly about both sides (or three or four, why limit?), set up introductory arguments, a series of questions for debaters to answer, and closing arguments with time limits. Get a personality to moderate who can keep the debaters calm and on topic while being fair and even.
~Set up round room discussions. This is one that I think is highly under-used in fan cons. Take a topic and get five or six people who know about it. Set them up in a room where each of them have their own area and let the audience rotate to hear the people they want to hear talk about the topic. This can be formal, such as "10 minutes at each station", or it can be informal and people can move when they wish. This is especially good for how-to topics such as crafting demonstrations where each station can be doing a different technique that accomplishes the goal (like makeup or dying) or other techniques such as writers and worldbuilding or getting started where individuals can have a lot of questions that are short and probably won't be asked in a more formal setting.
~Have an individual question-and-answer session for a person or group of people on a related topic. Instead of having a moderator come up with questions have an audience who knows they're supposed to come with questions about the topic, and have interesting guests they'll want to hear talk. Worried that you won't get enough questions? Create a list of backups, both formal and informal. Ask for submissions on the website, twitter, facebook for the con after the panel has been announced. If you're really worried find a website/blog/forum/lj/whatever for the topic or guest and ask them to come up with your backup questions (or, heck, all the questions, make it a gimmick "Bob's Twitter Q&A"). Bonus if you can record or transcribe the answers for the online helpers afterward.
~Create a game show. I don't know why more sci-fi cons don't do this (except maybe work and/or tech). A panel with the same people and the same topics could be made more exciting if the questions were chosen by the panelists from a jeopardy board and they were given 3 minutes to talk on the question they chose at random.
~Have a roast/tribute. Get knowledgeable people to talk about the guest of honor, how they are influenced by them/their work, how they first encountered it, and personal stories and anecdotes about their relationships. Can go together with a GOH speech to make it less pressure on the guest to speak for an entire hour. Can also work for non-guests, such as deceased people, favorite characters, popular series, etc.
~Create variety in showings. This is another area of programming that seems really stagnant: we pick shows from a formula to get variety then stick them in a small room and hope people go. In the age of amazon, torrent, and netflix it's not really working like it did when it was conceptualized. Showings could benefit from an injection of programming variety. Programming can schedule a showing with a following panel analyzing the themes in the show, how it varies from written work, plot its history, or talk about other shows like it. A group of funny people can be collected to do an MST3K-ish showing presentation. A variety of experts (say, a writer, a costumer, an actor, etc) can be collected to talk about what this particular show can teach people in their field.
~Set up some kind of topic-specific social hour. Cons are huge and meeting people can be a problem, especially people who share more niche interests within the larger con scheme. Not everyone can do late night drinking parties for various reasons (night, crowding, alcoholic, mobility, etc). Giving daytime and afternoon socialization opportunities maximizes the integration of new people into your convention.
Other things cons can do? Vary the people. I would love to see a con have a set policy of each year getting 10% of speakers as people who've never done a panel at the con, and 30% of presenters every year are retired for a year. As long as everyone rotates through who is retiring, even the popular people, it gives panelists a rest/fun year while keeping the panelist pool larger and constantly stirred. You can also rotate panelists into the moderator pool, making them the questioners and not the talkers to pull them out of their comfort zone. I know it's a hot topic, but I also really like DragonCon's track system. Dedicating a room and a staffer to a topic distributes the load, makes it easier for fans to find the panels on that topic, and helps to ensure variety in topics. It also creates a smaller community within a con that helps fans to find people who are interested in the subsets of the con's subject that attract fans. Even if the tracks are not as formal or public as DragonCon they can still be used internally by programming to make sure the topics are varied and similar items are not programmed opposite each other. You should also be sure to make a variety of seriousness, from goofing panels to entertainment panels to history panel, informative panels, how-to panels, and demonstrations within each topic area. There should be a variety of formalities, from informal people making fun to a highly structured debate. Different things appeal to different people (or even the same people, people like variety) and having a variety keeps people coming back.
Why don't cons do this now? Because it's work, and cons are run by volunteers with real lives. I get that. I think, though, that a lot of this is stagnation of the "this is how it's done" variety where no one has suggested there is any alternative. Maybe by just suggesting that things could be different people will stop doing the same-old and attempt to make programming better. Even better, by creating such disparate kinds of panels programming will stop putting all its eggs in one basket and even if an individual flakes on a panel and is not prepared there are plenty of other kinds of panels to go around.