[Chapter-delegates] Chapter advice on live streaming
Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond
ocl at gih.com
Mon Sep 16 18:58:56 PDT 2024
Dear Ted,
Thank you for responding to my comments.
I have previously articulated that focusing on “live streaming” as a
descriptor for the service provided by Joly McFie is a misdirection.
Reiterating the former CEO’s email from April 8th is equally
unproductive, as we have already observed the manner in which he
defended his decision. However, if you are emphasizing his email, I
would appreciate it if you could share the Communications Department’s
analysis along with the supporting data, comparing it with the social
media metrics for the ISOC YouTube channel. Additionally, I am
interested in the brand placement analysis, social media analysis, and
search engine optimization figures that demonstrate the Internet
Society’s online performance. This includes metrics such as likes,
comments, shares, engagement rate, reach (including by geographical
region), impressions, follower growth rate, click-through rate,
conversion rate, brand mentions, and sentiment analysis, particularly
concerning the Internet Society’s image and core messages. Furthermore,
the amount of referral traffic and watch time are critical metrics that
should not be overlooked.
If the Communications Department has conducted an analysis of ISOC.Live,
I would expect a similar analysis for the Internet Society’s own
channels. This cost analysis should include benchmarking a cost of
$63,000 against the Internet Society’s own production team costs.
Based on Vint's suggestion, I have compiled my own basic metrics, which
are calculated approximately on a monthly basis. It is important to note
that I have been generous in my assessment, as ISOC.LIVE content
primarily consists of fully edited and processed productions. In
contrast, the Internet Society YouTube channel predominantly features
unstructured short videos or simple recordings of Zoom calls.
Additionally, while the Internet Society YouTube channel initially
contained a significant amount of Chapter-related content, such mentions
have become infrequent in recent times.
Internet Society Youtube Channel:
599 Videos, 7.38K subscribers
Most popular video: Four Reasons to Care About Your Digital Footprint -
8 year ago - 304K views
In fact, the most recent of the top 20 popular videos on the channel was
done 5 years ago. Most of the others, 8+ years ago.
September 2024: 2 videos, 81 views
August 2024: 7 videos, 477 views
July 2024: 5 videos, 381 views
June 2024: 0 videos, 0 views
May 2024: 2 videos, 184 views
April 2024: 0 videos, 0 views
March 2024: 0 videos, 0 views
February 2024, 0 videos, 0 views
January 2024: 0 videos, 0 views
December 2023: 0 videos, 0 views
November 2023: 4 videos, 360 views
October 2023: 20 videos, 1540 views (includes presentation of all the
Youth Ambassadors 2023)
Total: 40 videos and 3023 views
ISOC.Live
1368 videos, 24K followers
Most popular videos: HOPE 2024 - 2 months ago - 5.8K views. Indigenous
Connectivity Forum, 3 months ago, 1K views. State of the Net plenary +
breakout 1, 7 months ago, 1.4K views.
September 2024: 7 videos, 189 views
August 2024: 10 videos, 280 views
July 2024: 11 videos, 6100 views
June 2024: 15 videos, 1520 views
May 2024: 17 videos, 698 views
April 2024: 18 videos, 579 views
March 2024: 13 videos, 226 views
February 2024, 8 videos, 1610 views
January 2024: 3 videos, 315 views
December 2023: 12 videos, 288 views
November 2023: 8 videos, 112 views
October 2023: 13 videos, 693 views (includes presentation of all the
Youth Ambassadors 2023)
Total: 135 videos and 12 610 views
Comparing the stats for ISOC.LIVE with ISOC YouTube ("YT"):
Month ISOC.Live Nr. Videos ISOC.Live Nr. Views ISOC YT Nr. Videos
ISOC YT Nr. Views
Sep-24 7 189 2 81
Aug-24 10 280 7 477
Jul-24 11 6100 5 381
Jun-24 15 1520 0 0
May-24 17 698 2 184
Apr-24 18 579 0 0
Mar-24 13 226 0 0
Feb-24 8 1610 0 0
Jan-24 3 315 0 0
Dec-23 12 288 0 0
Nov-23 8 112 4 360
Oct-23 13 693 20 1540
Total 135 12610 40 3023
Costs for ISOC.Live:
$64k / 135 = $474 per video produced/archived
$64k / 12610 = $5 per unique view
Considering that this was conducted on Vimeo’s Livestream, which is not
the most widely used platform, these figures are quite satisfactory.
I have shared the most basic metrics I have, please share yours.
Kindest regards,
Olivier
On 16/09/2024 17:06, Ted Hardie wrote:
> Hi Olivier,
>
> Several times in this message you refer to live streaming as a
> "critical" or "core" service. Live streaming is a part of the
> execution of the communications plan, and it was in that context that
> it was analyzed. As Andrew noted in his message on this topic on
> April 8th, that analysis showed that many of the live streams
> attracted very few attendees and some none. As there are other
> methods for recording many of the events, the decision was made to
> move the live streaming contract to a project basis, rather than a
> retainer basis. This in no way reflects on the quality of the
> service; it reflects a change in how media is being consumed not just
> for ISOC events but very broadly.
>
> As the response from the board notes, if there is new data here, this
> will be revisited, and data from the chapters on their use of live
> streaming is welcome. In the case that it does change, the board is
> confident that the staff will issue an appropriate RFP and analyze the
> responses appropriately.
>
> regards,
>
> Ted Hardie
>
> On Mon, Sep 16, 2024 at 4:40 PM Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond
> <ocl at gih.com> wrote:
>
> Dear Ted,
>
> Thank you for your response. Given your valid point regarding the
> openness of the Chapter Delegate mailing list, I will focus
> exclusively on the ISOC.Live Streaming and Archiving service,
> which primarily serves Chapters.
>
> Aligning with the previous CEO's statements, you mentioned that
> the decision to close ISOC.LIVE was made by staff. However, this
> misses a crucial point: the request to resume funding was formally
> submitted by Chapters to the ISOC Board of Trustees through the
> Chapter Advisory Council. A formal decision from the ISOC Board of
> Trustees was necessary, requiring adherence to governance
> principles, including transparency and accountability, which your
> response lacks.
>
> I refer you to my previous points made to Luis concerning the
> Board of Trustees' responsibilities, beyond their fiduciary duties:
>
> According to the US Council of Nonprofits
> (https://www.councilofnonprofits.org/running-nonprofit/governance-leadership/board-roles-and-responsibilities):
>
> "A board of directors does not exist solely to fulfill legal
> duties and serve as a fiduciary of the organization’s assets.
> Board members also play significant roles in providing guidance to
> nonprofits by contributing to the organization’s culture,
> strategic focus, effectiveness, and financial sustainability, as
> well as serving as ambassadors and advocates. Beyond fulfilling
> legal duties, board members can be important resources for the
> organization in multiple ways."
>
> Merely rubber-stamping staff decisions can lead to significant
> failures, as evidenced by numerous corporate governance disasters.
> A pertinent example is the failed attempt to sell PIR, which
> severely damaged the Internet Society's reputation. It is
> advisable for all Board members to undertake a basic course on
> their rights and responsibilities to ensure effective governance
> and fulfil their critical roles as outlined above.
>
> If ISOC.Live is considered a critical service for one of the
> Internet Society’s three core communities, the ISOC Board of
> Trustees is obligated to take action and fulfil their
> responsibilities, rather than avoiding them.
>
> Kind regards,
>
> Olivier Crépin-Leblond
>
>
>
> On 16/09/2024 09:04, Ted Hardie wrote:
>> Hi Olivier,
>>
>> Thanks for expressing your thoughts on this matter. You ask
>> below whether the Board will be "formally notifying the Chair of
>> the Chapter Advisory Council, along with her Council Board
>> members, of the rejection of the Chapter Advisory Council’s Advice?"
>>
>> On the question of the openness of the chapter delegate list, the
>> board has pointed out that there is no need for board action
>> here, since the history shows that the original action to close
>> it was taken by the ChAC. This is not a rejection of the advice;
>> it is a continuation of the dialogue with the ChAC on how to
>> accomplish their goal and a note that the staff contacts will be
>> able to help worth through the options with them.
>>
>> On the question of live streaming, the board has reminded the
>> ChAC that the decision to move to a project basis for live
>> streaming was a staff decision, based on an analysis of the
>> consumption patterns of the relevant media. The board's role
>> here was to set the goals for the communication plan; it does not
>> direct the staff on how to structure contracts nor would it be
>> appropriate for the board to require specific contractors. It
>> has also noted that data from the chapters on the consumption
>> patterns they see when using live streaming would be valuable
>> input to ongoing analysis of how to best meet the goals of the
>> communication plan.
>>
>> I do not believe I would characterize either response as a
>> rejection of the advice of the ChAC. The board has responded and
>> clarified its roles here, and in neither case would it be the
>> right body to take the action requested. We are happy to have
>> the staff support the ChAC in meeting its goals directly in the
>> first instance and in the second instance to work together with
>> the chapters to continue the analysis of consumption patterns and
>> communication strategies.
>>
>> The ChAC has been kind enough to invite me to the call tomorrow,
>> September 17th, and I look forward to the opportunity for us to
>> chat together.
>>
>> best regards,
>>
>> Ted Hardie
>>
>> On Sun, Sep 15, 2024 at 1:36 PM Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond
>> <ocl at gih.com> wrote:
>>
>> Dear Ted,
>>
>> Thank you for explaining the process by which the Internet
>> Society Board of Trustees reached its decision. I question
>> the appropriateness of this process, given the formal nature
>> of the request made by the Chapter Advisory Council, which
>> included a vote and extensive documentation.
>>
>> Could you please clarify the rationale behind the decision
>> not requiring a formal resolution? Is it not customary for
>> the Board to formally endorse or reject formal Advice upon
>> receipt? What measures of accountability does the Board have
>> in its decisions if they are based on informal processes that
>> lack transparency and traceability? Considering the fiduciary
>> responsibilities of all Board members, how many other
>> decisions of the Board are subjected to this “informal”
>> process, of which non-Board members were previously unaware?
>>
>> Finally, will you be formally notifying the Chair of the
>> Chapter Advisory Council, along with her Council Board
>> members, of the rejection of the Chapter Advisory Council’s
>> Advice?
>>
>> Kind regards,
>>
>> Olivier Crépin-Leblond
>>
>>
>> On 13/09/2024 12:36, Ted Hardie wrote:
>>> Hi Olivier,
>>>
>>> The board has an active mailing list and informal meetings
>>> once a month (though August's meeting did not occur this
>>> year because of low availability). The discussion took
>>> place mostly on the mailing list, along with trustees' edits
>>> of a proposal using online tools. Because this response did
>>> not require a resolution, confirmation of agreement was
>>> assessed on the list and confirmed at the September informal
>>> meeting, earlier this week. None of those methods generate
>>> minutes in the formal sense, but I can confirm that there
>>> was consensus for the response.
>>>
>>> regards,
>>>
>>> Ted Hardie
>>>
>>> On Fri, Sep 13, 2024 at 12:16 PM Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond
>>> <ocl at gih.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> Dear Ted,
>>>
>>> I acknowledge receipt of your response, which I have
>>> reviewed with interest.
>>>
>>> The Chapter Advisory Council submitted its formal
>>> request on 17 July 2024. The Board, through its Chair,
>>> issued its, I assume, formal response on 13 September 2024.
>>>
>>> Upon reviewing the list of ISOC Board Meetings available
>>> at Internet Society Board of Trustees Meetings
>>> <https://www.internetsociety.org/board-of-trustees/meetings/>,
>>> I have not identified any meetings of the ISOC Board of
>>> Trustees occurring between these dates.
>>>
>>> Given that this decision was made by the Board, I kindly
>>> request the following:
>>>
>>> * The minutes of the meeting during which the Board
>>> decided not to reinstate the ISOC.LIVE video
>>> production, editing, and archiving services.
>>>
>>> Warmest regards,
>>>
>>> Olivier Crépin-Leblond
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On 13/09/2024 09:17, Ted Hardie via Chapter-delegates wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Dear colleagues,
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> One of the items in your recent advice to the board was
>>>> a request that the "ISOC funding for the ISOC.LIVE
>>>> video production, editing, and archiving services
>>>> should be reinstated, as well as ISOC.LIVE should be
>>>> financially supported by ISOC on an ongoing basis."
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> The board's role here is to set the direction for the
>>>> organization by establishing strategic goals; the
>>>> details of the communication plan are a part of the
>>>> staff execution of those goals. During the budget
>>>> analysis of 2023, the communications team analyzed the
>>>> effectiveness of specific streaming approaches and
>>>> found that community engagement was driven primarily by
>>>> on-demand viewing. This matches a broader shift common
>>>> to mainstream programming. As a result of this
>>>> analysis, the communications plan shifted away from a
>>>> retainer-based contract for live streaming to a
>>>> project-based funding model for future work.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> This was a staff management decision, taken with due
>>>> care and analysis. The board's role is to assess
>>>> whether the overall communications plan is effective in
>>>> meeting the strategic goals; it does not direct the
>>>> staff to use specific contract types or contractors.
>>>> If the needs of the communications plan change again to
>>>> require live streaming on a full-time basis, the board
>>>> is confident that the staff will issue the appropriate
>>>> RFP and conduct the appropriate analysis of the
>>>> submissions.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> The project-based funding model remains available, and
>>>> chapters may, of course, fund specific live streaming
>>>> events using chapter funds or Beyond The Net grants.
>>>> Any analysis of the effectiveness of those live
>>>> streaming events would be valuable data for any future
>>>> considerations of the engagement model.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> The board thanks the ChaC for its attention to the
>>>> communications plan, and we look forward to continued
>>>> discussion of how to engage the broader community in
>>>> the mission of the society.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Best regards,
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Ted Hardie
>>>> for the Board
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> As an Internet Society Chapter Officer you are automatically subscribed
>>>> to this list, which is regularly synchronized with the Internet Society Chapter Portal (AMS):https://community.internetsociety.org.
>>>> -
>>>> View the Internet Society Code of Conduct:https://www.internetsociety.org/become-a-member/code-of-conduct/
>>>
>>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://elists.isoc.org/mailman/private/chapter-delegates/attachments/20240917/133933a1/attachment-0001.htm>
More information about the Chapter-delegates
mailing list