My 2011 SXSW Interactive Panel Proposal

With a huge nudge from Adria Richards, I submitted a proposal to the Panelpicker for the 2011 South by Southwest Interactive Festival. You can read all you want about what the Panelpicker is, exactly. The short version is that the general public gets to submit ideas which are vetted by SXSW staff, whittled down, and then turned back over to the public for voting. Panelpicker votes, however, are only worth 30% in the selection process. The remainder comes from SXSW Interactive staff (30%) and an advisory board (40%).

So I made it over hurdle #1 (submitting something in the first place) and hurdle #2 (making it into the Panelpicker). My panel proposal is entitled How to Ensure a Diverse Tech Event:

Description
Social networking is supposed to be the ultimate facilitator of grassroots interaction between producers and consumers. In the tech space, these online interactions go offline at conferences and unconferences around the world. Social networking is supposed to level the playing field, but it’s still the rare tech conference that accurately reflects its real audience – the users, the consumers, the benefactors of technology. Are you hoping to attract more diverse audiences to your existing programming or are you tailoring your programming to diverse audiences? How can your product appeal to a diverse audience if you don’t have a diverse group developing it? Does your event allow affinity groups to connect in a meaningful way? Individuals, organizations, conference organizers, sponsors and bloggers will walk away with actionable steps they can take to diversify events. We’ll explore what event organizers like O’Reilly are doing to encourage new people to attend. We’ll explore the barriers individuals face when joining new online communities and when transitioning into offline participation, as well as opportunities for contribution within the community.
Questions Answered
Why is it not good enough that I already know the best and smartest people to speak on a topic?
How can I get diverse representation without merely showcasing a token?
How does diverse programming and attendance translate to a better event? i.e., Why should I bother?
What are event organizers sure that they’re doing right that they’re actually doing very wrong (and what should they do instead)?
Why are we even still talking about this?

So if you’d like to help me out, click through, sign up/log in, and click the thumbs up. Thanks in advance.

I’m a tiny bit pleased that my proposal was written well enough such that I didn’t even have suggestions from the staff on sprucing it up for public consumption. Many folks did get comments/help from the staff and the extent to which the staff helps presenters prepare has really increased. After all, it’s in SXSW’s best interest as a whole to make sure the presentations are good. It reminds me a lot of what the Minnesota Fringe Festival does to help producers/artists prepare for that event.

There are different approaches a potential panelist can take at this point. One can pimp the hell out of themselves and tweet about it constantly, post it on every single social network they inhabit, and generally not shut up about it for two weeks. Or one can trust that the proposal is strong enough that the staff and advisory panel will select it. The public vote is not the be-all-end-all. Thus, groveling for public votes doesn’t necessarily help you as much as you might think. I’m mostly in this camp, but it doesn’t hurt to get the thumbs up (and comments!) from seasoned SXSW attendees and panelists. I hate hate hate to ask for votes, but I’m hoping I can cash in some of that social capital I’ve earned. So I’ve only occasionally tweeted. And I do really appreciate all those folks who have included me in their tweets and posts about what panels they like.

(It occurred to me that even if I don’t do it at SXSW, I should probably make this presentation somewhere. Both because the topic is important, and because it’d be good practice and personal growth for me. Plus, it feels like a way to give back to all the people who helped me get here.)

Two potential panelists (and fellow Twin Citizens) have talked recently about the position they find themselves in at this point in the panel selection process. Jen Kane wrote a great post about being an underdog and what this speaking opportunity will mean for her. You should read it anyway because it’s applicable to a situation a lot of people find themselves in (not just for SXSW) and Jen just tells it like it is, which makes for a fun read. Nancy Lyons and Meghan Wilker, aka the Geek Girls, just did a podcast entitled The Pain of Self-Promotion. All 38 minutes are really worth a listen because there’s some important context here. (If you feel like you can’t commit, listen to it at 2x speed like I do with all my podcasts.) And, hey, you’ll get a preview of what their presentations are like.

What feels far more comfortable for me is recommending the panels of people I know. Not just because they’re my friends, but because I know they’re good at what they do and know of which they speak. (Which is ironic considering some elements of my panel description, but work with me.) The list is long and I’m not going to transcribe the whole thing. There’s a list of Minnesotans (which I’m not on, because it’s all PR people, because it was written for a PR blog). There’s a list of black people in technology. (I may be the only black/brown person from Minnesota, but I’m not sure.)

I’m not going to write up my whole long list of every panel I gave a thumbs up, but I will share my frontrunners. I wrote last year about my Panelpicker perusing process. It still largely holds true.