“Chris Messina, 26, and two fellow Web2Open organizers stood on chairs in one of the Moscone Center’s alcoves, addressing a crowd of about 80. Speaking without microphones, they asked everyone to introduce themselves and offer three “tags,” or one-word descriptions, to give a sense of their topics of interest.”
from this article on unconferences by Scott Kirsner.
Seriously…months of hard work and being the ‘lead’ on the project, I get reduced to a chair perched by-stander? Luckily Chris has piped up on the subject before me, but wtf?! This ain’t the first time. And I’m not imagining things.
Wanna know what this does to a woman who already struggles to be taken seriously in the web world as a woman and a marketer (both are strikes against me)?
- It makes me feel invisible and useless
- It robs me of a mainstream press mention that shows my ever being involved in such events - which, unfortunately, seems to be the measuring stick of any sort of notability (which Chris gets to keep due to the fact that he is a “notable developer” - hint: he’s not a developer)
- It robs other women who want to get involved in BarCamp an example of someone doing it
- It makes me feel like an idiot for wasting my precious time to talk to reporters at all - time that could have been spent seeing more sessions and making sure that some of the components went better.
Yes, I’m bitter. Yes, I’m pissed. I’m busting my ass this week to give three talks at a government conference in New Zealand and the last thing I needed was a blow to my self-worth. It’s NOT just about getting women involved, it’s also about how you treat them when they are involved. If I’m the bloody project lead, I should get the mention. I wasn’t being paid for it.
27 Comments
a-fucking-men
pun & sacriledge intended
businessweek, fortune & wsj - some friends in the business refer to them as business born
the sad thing is that patriarchy is a nasty dino that senses doom, so it is fighting all out
stay pissed - make change
in the words of the poet ani difranco:
some chick says
thank you for saying all the things I never do
I say
the thanks I get is to take all the shit for you
it’s nice that you listen
it’d be nicer if you joined in
as long as you play their game girl
you’re never going to win
Bob Carlton was right as long as you play their game whoever “they are” you loose. Put it in military terms the objective of acommander is to make the enemy fight on his territory not the one the enemy chooses.
Try and trick “them” into giving you the site of your choosing. It si twice as hard but that is how you get what you need, please note “NEED” it is not what you want but what you need that counts.If you want approbation then do a strip tease but if you want something else then figure put how towant to make them want you. This has nothing to do with your sex but everything to do with your stratergy and tactics you hace to use both. Good luck if its not too late in NZ.
Fuck ‘em. Ignore it.
Molly recently clued me in to the fact that the term research journalism is an oxymoron. Once upon a time all journalists were researchers. Now it’s some special badge bestoyed to a writer that does more research then asking questions of a person immediately involved. Fact checking is also gone. Soon the same will be the case for weekly periodicals.
You are creating your own destiny. You are *literally* changing the world in a small but significant way. That is real and will be very rewarding when you look back on your life.
So fuck’em. They’ll know your name well enough before their careers are over ;>
Hold on a second, Bob Carlton - Tara never mentioned anything about the audience demographic. It could have been all women for all you know, so engage your brain before going on your personal crusade.
I do sympathise, and it’s very annoying that you won’t always get the mention - that’s the danger of PR and public speaking - it relies on other people. Can’t win them all, but I hope you’ll bounce back soon…
From your Magnolia link:
“But, hey, I’m just some chick standing on a chair, right?”
Ummm, NO!
I’ve not yet had the pleasure of meeting you in person, but follow your blog because it is interesting and thought provoking. Having experienced one barcamp and likely to be involved in another, I value the work that you have put in.
And I’m with Ted Rheingold - “Fuck ‘em!”
- Neil.
Tara,
Try to ignore. I understand its difficult. But you know what you are worth and how much people respect ya.
Cheer up!
I am another reader who has never met you or even had the opportunity to be at a barcamp yet (though I am excited about the idea). My world is the world of the church, and it seems it is not unlike the world of technology in how we honor and value women. That word “honor” is the key word. You should not have to fight for it or demand it. Because you are a person of worth, you receive it. But we are not good at honoring women (apparently a more universal problem). I can honestly say I value what you are doing. I follow your writings and have watched some of your presentations on-line and have found them to be of great use. So, don’t give up. I have spent 10 years in my world trying to make myself heard (I have 3 daughters with incredible gifts and talents that I desire to release to a world that is different) and your help and continued fight is necessary. Blessings.
My wife has been dealing with a lot of similar issues recently. The animation studio she works at has had several articles in area newspapers and a few specials on our local news channel. Almost every time, there is a photo or video of here working, but her commentary has been cut out every time.
Unfortunately, we’ve learned that the Fuck ‘em attitude usually doesn’t work. Kelley and I have tried it and it usually just results in more of the same.
In the end, the only thing that may bring about real change for these publications, is embarrassment. Some news organization will pick up on this and make it the talking point of the day. When Business Week gets publicly labeled as a group of misogynistic morons, they’ll start making changes.
Tara,
Those in the tech community recognize your achievements. The Business Weeks/ MSM of the world are the followers and will eventually catch up.
Tara — You deserve credit for your hard work, period. And given the impact you’re having in this slice of the world, I agree with Ted’s comment above: “They’ll know your name well enough before their careers are over ;>”
Just a question, though: Did you contact Kirsner? I don’t know him, but maybe he’d be willing to explain the article’s angle, explain his take on your work, explain his ignorance of your work, or whatever. From (somewhat) long experience as a writer and editor, I know that context is often what gets left on the cutting-room floor. This isn’t to excuse Kirsner if he slanted the story away from you, but maybe there’s the chance to call this to his attention in a way that he (or BizWeek) won’t make the same mistake again. I mean, he’s a guy worth convincing, considering how much he gets around in the biz/tech press.
Just a thought. Meanwhile, rock the casbah in New Zealand.
This is suckage, and has been on my mind a fair bit since I read your and Chris’ post last night. As a white dude who passes as straight, I reap many of the implicit benefits. But as a gay guy, I do feel for what you go through, in terms of invisibility and disenfranchisement.
When when queer folk are often proportionally represented in other technology sectors, I wonder why I can count the number of lesbian, gay or bisexual people in this particular new-brave-web community on one hand, especially in such a welcoming city as San Francisco. It feels especially bad for me, as it feels it did when I first came out as a teenager over two decades ago. Now, I’m so far beyond this, it’s not even funny!
I do agree with Ted, but I have to say that I think this is something that all of us who are in here and willing to participate already know and do. If we didn’t have extraordinarily high bs filters, we would have been so checked out by now.
Finally, Tara, I hope you know this, but I just wanted to say again what an inspiration you are for me and I especially appreciate you’re willingness to keep on bringing this up.
I agree it’s a poor piece of writing, but while a bit sad this doesn’t really surprise me. But don’t think for a moment that you’re not making progress, Tara. You’re an innovator in a field that has and still does attract more men than women. Work like yours, the examples you set, help change that historic trend for a more balanced future. Sadly, this sort of change happens slowly. Agonizingly slowly, compared to how fast we of the web witness change. Sometimes being at a leading edge brings unwanted attention; sometimes people try to ignore what they don’t get.
I dont’ think the writer should be insulted, and assumptions about why he focussed on Chris while ignoring Tara’s and Ross’ roles won’t get us far. Instead, he should be educated about how poorly he grasped the event he tried to cover. He clearly didn’t walk away with an understanding of the changing face of tech and the principles that Barcamp puts into action. The focus on dollars and cents in the article makes that clear. He missed the better story for more of the same-old, same-old. I’ll be sure to write an email saying so, I hope others will, too.
For every business writer who doesn’t get it I have to believe there are young women out there who wonder about their place in the tech world and learn that they can follow those dreams from people like you, doing what you’re doing. You’ll meet them, and they’ll outshine Gollum any day.
Tara,
You rock! I don’t know what else to say.
Tara,
You are inspiring. I know you will keep making change happen.
For what it’s worth, your session was the highlight for me of Wednesday’s GOVIS. All ideas I can dwell on and use. I’m looking forward to your keynote in an hour
Oops, wrong day… make that 25 hours! (NZT of course)
I guess I need an italian word to say it in french : bravo, bravo, bravo ! Ah, j’oubliais : on t’aime, continue
As much as this kind of sexism frustrates me - and believe me, I share your frustration! - perhaps Todd’s comments regarding Scott’s coverage have validity. Perhaps this is yet another example of the MSM not getting the paradigm shift in media. On some level Scott must not have gotten the point of the whole BarCamp movement and its focus on inclusion - perhaps it didn’t sink into it yet. Perhaps he’s also covering it with this ‘gotta write a 800 word piece on unconferences - stick to the main stuff and gloss over the important details” point of view. (Not making excuses for him, of course).
It is continually frustrating though - this seems to keep on happening, and varients of sexism and outright misogny (cf. Kathy Sierra’s ordeal) still live with us. The only good is that for every instance that we smash our heads up against the glass ceiling, others do notice - including the men (like Chris, like Robert Scoble, who noted his disgust with what happenned to Kathy). You’re *not* invisible or useless. As hard as it may be to do, we have to slay the inner Gollums and have strength in our voices - they do get heard, even if it’s not by the reporters
*hugs*
It’s hard with blows like this, but the only choice is to keep doing the great work you are doing.
I saw how hard you worked and I saw your passion. I wouldn’t be the only one.
Unfortunately, this unevenness of male/female perception will be a marathon, not a sprint.
All I can do is echo what’s been said above. While it sucks that they botched the article, both you and the community know who the leaders are.
I don’t think screwups like this are intentional, but are more likely an invisible bias that writers have. Their perception of events is colored by their expectations and that manifests itself in mistakes like this.
Hopefully your post (and others linking to it and covering the issue) will help to raise awareness of those invisible biases help writers to see through them in the future.
In the meantime, there’s no denying that it sucks.
I know I’m going to regret stepping into this one, but here I go…
First off, let me say that I agree with you and the commenters that there is a real issue with women and tech. Even more than that, we have a problem in this country (as well as too many other parts of the world) in that kids, male or female, aren’t interested in science and tech. It’s a huge issue that will and is affecting the economy worldwide. Pew recently said that 80% of 18-25 year olds said that their biggest goal in life was to get rich. Of that same group, 50% said their goal was also to “be famous”. I’ve worked in tech for nearly 15 years and have seen a lot of things I didn’t like and I’ve worked to do my part in the balance as much as I can.
That said, I’m not ready to publicly flog Scott Kirsner just yet.
I really do understand where you’re coming from: I spent nearly a year and a half on the story that ended up getting featured on the cover of Wired. Without my incessant pushing to make the project happen in the first place, it would have died on the vine. I was disappointed that the article never once mentioned me, sure.
But I remind myself that my task in that situation wasn’t to promote Jake, it was to promote the project. My job as an evangelist was to let everyone else take the spotlight.
Obviously I don’t have all the facts here, but as I understand the story, I’ve been in this situation many many times - an evangelist talks to a reporter, the reporter writes a story that includes everyone but the evangelist. Sorry to say, this is the right way for things to happen.
You have to ask yourself if this interview was supposed to be about Tara or about unconferences. If the former, then the article was a miserable failure. But if it’s the later, then the article is fantastic. Reporters of all genders (I’ve had both men and women do this to me) seem to feel odd about reporting on the person introducing them to a subject unless the subject is that person. My guess is that if roles with you and Chris had been reversed, you’d have gotten the mention, simply because Chris would have been the one talking to the reporter. Sometimes calling out the group/event leader specifically gives the story more weight. But in this article, a look at a grassroots, user generated event, calling out the key/single/main organizer completely undercuts the position of the article.
The way I read the technical structure of the article, the only reason Chris is “introduced” is to prep the reader for the call-out of Chris asking users for speaking ideas on Post-Its. This is an example of how the unconference works, and my guess is that’s what Chris was standing on a chair doing.
Trust me, I know the sting of non-inclusion in articles like this…it’s literally happened to me at least 30-40 times. You work your ass off and you want to be recognized for it. But again, either you’re looking at this from a standpoint of unconference publicity or Tara Hunt publicity. There can only be one first priority here.
Again, not trying to undercut your overall issue with the tech industry and women. I agree that there is an imbalance and that we’d all benefit from improving that balance.
Hey Jake, I appreciate what you’re trying to say, but I’m not sure it’s helping…
The truth is that, whatever Scott’s angle was, it’s shoddy reporting to make it look like I was responsible for Web2Open when it should have been Tara getting the credit. I worked on it, but it all came together because of Tara’s hard work and determination. That that aspect of reality wasn’t communicated is not just unfair to her and evidence of gender blindness, but it’s just frankly incorrect.
Furthermore, Tara didn’t suggest that the article should be about her; but it should be accurate. That accuracy happens to demand that she be given credit as the organizer is really what’s the underlying issue here. Let’s not lynch Scott for picking characters, let’s take a harsher look at incorrect reporting that results in marginally those who both deserve credit and have a hard enough time being made visible as it is.
…”I’m not sure it’s helping…”
Helping what, exactly? Not sure what you mean, but I’m usually of the opinion that an open discussion where more than one position is presented and discussed is best. The other option is the Echo Chamber, and we know how Tara feels about the Echo Chamber
But perhaps this isn’t the place to have such a discussion…I’ll take it to my blog.
Thanks Chris,
And I also wanted to add something. I don’t think the article should have been about me…nor even include a quote from me. I don’t mind that at all and Chris’ quote was great.
But, if we are talking about promoting a project, my greatest and dearest project is increasing the visibility of women in tech. Thus, when Scott failed to add my name to the organizers list, which would have been the same number of words:
Chris Messina, 26, and two fellow Web2Open organizers stood on chairs in one of the Moscone Center’s alcoves, addressing a crowd of about 80
vs.
Chris Messina, Tara Hunt and Ross Mayfield stood on chairs in one….
(somehow the age is applicable, but the fellow organizers are not?)
he perpetuated the invisibility of the women who are organizing these events. Furthermore, Kaliya Hamlin, a long-time organizer of these events was also interviewed for the piece and didn’t get mentioned at all in lieu of the many male characters. See Kaliya’s post:
http://kaliyasblogs.net/unconference/?p=55
(I tried to comment, but wouldn’t accept my password)
I don’t think Scott meant any malice by any of this. Not at all. It’s one of those biases that people don’t even realize they have and that get perpetuated by just not realizing it.
Sure, the fall-out is that Tara Hunt doesn’t get publicity and I lose my wikipedia profile, etc. Really, that’s a side piece that is more a symptom of the issue than a cause. I have no lack of business accolades and, as the other amazing commenters have pointed out, I get more than enough recognition in our community. It’s not about me and I’m sorry if it came across that way.
I think what Chris means is that you may have mistaken my rant for a ‘poor me’ thing and it’s not. Please see my comments below.
I’m puzzling over something I see but don’t yet understand in the *Camp movement. I suspect that the percentage of women in the *Camp movement is higher than in the general geek population. Still, the men seem to be the ones getting the press. In and of itself, the men getting the press isn’t a problem… and the *Camp movement getting press is just great.
But hiding the women who are making a difference in the tech community, that’s significant. Why? There is currently a backlash: it seems that some young geeks think it’s ok to denigrate women colleagues or to relegate them to 2nd class citizenship. Perhaps women are too smart to put up with such treatment: clearly they are going elsewhere, as female enrollment in IT related degree programs is down (dropping from the whopping 10% it once reached).
We shouldn’t elevate women simply due to gender. But where women are providing leadership, it’s important to represent them as peers to their male counterparts. Well, it’s important if we care about increasing diversity in the workplace.
I see women as bringing different things (a generalization, true) to the workplace. Other groups do the same: people from different cultural backgrounds, those with different kinds of university degrees - or no degrees.
I don’t enjoy working in “boys’ club” type environments, I’d like to see more diversity, more balance. So I, too, will look for opportunities to draw attention to people providing leadership and exemplifying excellence and who break the stereotypes, as a way to encourage others to join the party. One way to provide this balance is to comment on journalism that perpetuates the stereotypes, which is perhaps what Chris was doing with his comment on the BW article.
What I’m wondering is this: is there something about how we women contribute to groups that makes us harder to spot? Do we ourselves need to do something more to be the role models we seek to provide?
deb
It’s sad to see you not receive the credit you deserve. Hopefully in the future not only yourself, but also other women who work hard and are never recognised, will receive the adulation that is deserved.
6 Trackbacks
[...] still love the unconference idea, but there is a gaping blind spot in the Business Week profile. Tara Hunt, the actual organizer of the Web2Open unconference in [...]
[...] to see a piece in Business Week about the *camp movement but not surprised at Tara’s reaction. The article explains what happened at Web2Open: “Chris Messina, 26, and two fellow Web2Open [...]
[...] 10th, 2007 · No Comments I recently read Tara’s rant (a rightful one) about how she was left out of a business week article about an event she was the [...]
[...] on the interesting way that the women involved had disappeared from the reporting. Particularly Tara Hunt, a leader on the team that organized the [...]
[...] 16th, 2007 I’ve been mulling over this post by Tara Hunt, and though it is a week old, I want to draw attention to [...]
[...] all started as a response to recent-ish blog entry I read, which spun off all sorts of thoughts I’ve had floating around my [...]