Middle of day two, WeMedia, Miami. Some observations:

• This is a conference that wants to be about media, technology, convergence and social justice.
• There’s a broad diversity of types of people, industries, ages.
• At moments it is rich and amazing, at other moments, it doesn’t gell.

Some of what is working really well for me:

• Connecting with social entrepreneurship and activist colleagues: Using social media for organizing and for community outreach are topics I am passionate about, but I feel my expertise sorely needs some updating. Meeting some of the folks in that space who are here and talking with them has providing lots of follow-up activities to learn more.
• Meeting new people, especially meeting some virtual connections in real time, and meeting media activists(see above).
• Reconnecting with old friends and colleagues–there are lots of media people here I had not seen for at least a year; catching up (and in some cases, asking for advice) has been productive.
• The power of cross-network discussions: crossing lines means interesting talks.

Some things that could have worked better, aka, let’s do it differently next time:

• More true tech people sharing the known known of the visible future: not enough voices talking about new tech tools that disrupt markets and shift behavior
• Metrics of success: How do you measure change and engagement? WeMedia is about rich conversations about what’s next and where the world is headed, but I’d like to see more discussions–and perhaps a workshop–about how you measure change, change measurements.
• More space for conversations, less talking heads. Why do I find many panels boring? I’m too much of a subversive to want the panel to control all of the discussion. I want the panel to control 40% of it, the audience to control the rest.

Conclusion: Would do it again, would disrupt it more next time if I had the chance. (Or help them make it more disruptive, themselves.)
Oh, make that disruptive and participatory.