Hello Everyone,
I wish to offer my sincere thanks for your assistance and willingness for the help and ideas in putting together a presentation and appear on the WUWT-TV event. Much of this came from reader’s ideas and insight.
We had a few technical glitches, we had a couple of embarrassing moments, and we had some great fun as well. The only criticisms that seemed to be pervasive was that it “wasn’t as well presented as Al Gore’s”.
Nothing could be truer, and nothing could be more illustrative of the disparity between the well funded “haves” and “have nots”. The next time somebody points to the meme “you skeptics are funded by big oil/big coal/ big something” all you need to do is point to this first effort, and that should shut them up because the entire WUWT effort was begged, borrowed, and donated from people “just like you” to borrow that PBS label.
In the process, I learned what to do and what not to do, and how to make the next effort better when we have to work on a limited budget. I think we won on the science content though.
Hilariously, we see still things like this coming from Gore during the event that tout that “big oil and “big coal” connection they imagine: http://realitydrop.org/about.
The video is priceless:
So, lessons learned, but we pulled it off, and I owe all of you a debt of gratitude. I’ll work to get YouTube recordings up next week. For now I need to rest a bit. Posting will be light this weekend.
Again, my sincerest thanks to all who contributed, participated, and watched. A special thanks to WUWT reader John Whitman who made two 300 mile round trip drives, battled a software learning curve, and spent over a week of his time working to bring us the “did you know” and Josh intermission slides. Thanks to Josh too.
Best Regards,
Anthony Watts, and Kenji
P.S. suggestions are welcome for how to use/improve this new medium.
PPS. It seems much of Mr. Gore’s traffic may have been bot driven, see this analysis left in comments:
==============================================================
Stephen Rasey
Submitted on 2012/11/16 at 2:54 pm
For fun, I was considering the proposition that each of the viewers of WUWT-TV and Gore-TV might belong to 1 of 2 populations:
X = population with a mean view time of 1 hr. (Watchers)
Y = population with a mean view time of T minutes. (Bots + thrashers)
Let T = average view time for the Y population.
Let TV = Total Views in 24 hours.
Let CV = Current Views average over 24 hr.
CV = X + Y
TV = 24* (X + Y*60/T)
Solution:
X = CV*(60/(60-T)) – TV*(T/(24*(60-T)))
Y = CV – X
TV(WUWT) = 16,690 (what I remembered seeing. I could be wrong.)
CV(WUWT) = 550 is my guess at an average in a range of 420-670 from personal observation. Until we have something better.
TV(Gore) = 15.7 million (from mfo 02:28 prev. thread) . I cannot confirm that, but Reg. Blank above reports about million at 2.25 hours, about 10% into it.
CV(Gore) = 9000 @ TV=300K, 1.5 hr;
= 11200 @ TV=500K, 1.9 hr.
= 12100 @ TV “close to a million” at 2.25 hr. from Reg. Blank above.
Shortly after this the CV counter was taken down. So we will have to guess this by exploring a range of possible values. An important constraint here is that the three observation points give a mean view time of only 3 minutes (approx.).
Frac_TV_X = Fraction of TV that can come from X population (1 hr mean) views.
Frac_TV_X = X*24/TV
First, WUWT-TV: (TV=16690, CV=550)
If T=0.16, X=550, Y=0.4, Frac_TV_X = 0.790
If T=1, X=548, Y=2, Frac_TV_X= 0.787
If T=10, X=521, Y=29, Frac_TV_X = 0.749
So 74-79% of the TV (total views) are coming from the population views with a mean 1 hr.
Now Gore-TV: (TV = 15.7 million)
If CV = 36000 (3 times highest known value)
If T=0.16; X=34347; Y=1653; Frac_TV_X=0.053
If T=1; X=25523; Y=10477; Frac_TV_X=0.039
If T=2; X=14684; Y=21316; Frac_TV_X=0.022
If T=3; X=3465; Y=32535; Frac_TV_X=0.005
T>4 is not possible.
If CV=24000, T=0.16; X=22315; Y=1685; Frac_TV_X=0.034
If CV=50000, T=0.16; X=48385; Y=1615; Frac_TV_X=0.074
If CV=100000, T=0.16; X=98518; Y=1482; Frac_TV_X=0.151
Note: T=0.16 represents a viewer that is opening the stream and shutting it down in a 10 second loop. With T=0.16, X = watchers, Y = ‘bots.’
Conclusion: X is tightly coupled with the estimate for CV. But the fraction of total views from 1-hr Watchers is illuminating. The Frac_TV_X (= 1hr people views / total views) is highest for high CV and low T. For CV = 36000 (3 time higher than any reported in the first two hours) only 5% of the total views were from “watchers”, 95% from bots. We have to use CV=100,000 (8 times higher than max observed), to reach a point where even 15% of total views could be from a population with a 1 hr mean view. At least 85% of total views were bots cycling every 10 seconds.
Anthony, you say thank you for watching … I say, thank you for making it possible for us to watch. I am sure that it was far more work than it appeared from this side of the screen, and from here it looked like a huge pile of work.
My thanks also to all who participated and put in their time and effort to make it all not just possible, but interesting, connected, and cohesive.
Once again, I am amazed by the amount of energy that it is possible to harness on a volunteer basis. Against your all-volunteer effort, Al Gore poured millions into his dog-and-pony show. And despite the huge funding disparity, I just googled the outcome. I found that 14 of the top 15 Google results from a search of “Al Gore “dirty weather” ” are for WattsUpWithThat.
That, for me, is quite amazing. There was no mention of Anthony Watts or WUWT in the search terms, no mention of anything but gore and “dirty weather”, the meme for his Climapalooza. Despite that, almost all of the top links are to WUWT.
So, Anthony, as usual you have done a sterling and successful job. My sincere felicitation for your 24-hour experiment, it was much appreciated.
w.
Yes, this event was memorable Anthony and I look forward to the U-tube recordings, especially Burt Rutan’s presentation.
I liked the studio set-up, it looked busy, the prominent microphone and equipment, middle distance composition was OK, lighting was warm and studio close-up’s were not necessary. The cut to laptop Skype produced a noticeable drop in quality and this was to be expected, however it can be improved, inexpensively, I do this at home.
1. Try to get presenters to avoid staring down at the screen with illumination provided by the screen,it is low resolution, blue colored and it looks like a B grade horror movie (the visuals not the content :).
Use two bedside lights with a warm color temperature positioned either side of the presenter with the main illumination source at eye level but diffuse. This will infill shadows, give a more studio quality and improve resolution and skin tone, female presenters appreciate this. To go one step further highlight the top of the head with a separate direct light. Evan Jones managed the head highlight but his face was in shadow.
2. Use a separate camera/microphone.
The audio/video quality is better and the presenter will be looking forward in a natural head position(as in looking at the horizon) as if in a standing conversation. Looking away from the camera occasionally to their notes and back to the camera simulates a real life conversation as well. Constantly boring down the camera can be tiresome for the viewer, but, the presenter must look at the camera again to really engage the viewer, not the screen, this is where a separate camera/microphone helps.
A memorable broadcast,
Keith.
IN the area of technical problems, I would suggest using videos, played at the main broadcast site for the guest’s presentations rather than a live feed. Not only would this allow the guest to redo all or part of their presentation to improve it, but would reduce the likelihood of on-air glitches.
Q & A afterwards might be live, but even that probably should be on video. and subject to editing. Even the pros learned early on in the history of TV the dangers of a live presentation, and they only wanted it for the audience response, which isn’t even a factor in your broadcast. It’s also less of a strain on the presenters if they aren’t live, and know they can correct via redos any glitches they might make.
Ross McKitrick was great !!!!
Outstanding work Anthony.
I think I ended up watching about 6 total hours!!
Thank you Anthony. I learned a lot in the short time I could watch. Looking forward to the video and being able to pull up topics of interest.
I did not get a chance to see any of it, and may not for a long time.
If you had problems, Anthony, hey, it was your First time, and despite the efforts of those who volunteered their technology to help you, it Was Your First Time.
Algor’s Snake Oil Show has had years to put its’ act together. I suspect in the end, your show will have gained the smarter audience.
Thank you Anthony, It was great.
I even got my happy-go-lucky husband to watch for several hours without falling asleep. If your information is riveting enough to keep a narcoleptic awake you know you and your guests did very well with the scientific content.
Congratulations, and BTW the “glitches” were part of the ‘charm’ and made it real instead of a polished ‘performance’
Thanks for the stepping up to host the show. Most of what I watched 6 hours so far on the show was true and had real data to back up claims. I did have one issue with guest on that talked about 2007 only being the lowest ice coverage in artic since satellite data started, 2012 was lowest.
Hope to watch rest soon if available on YouTube like source with being able to watch each guest interview.
Thanks again.
No sir thank you for providing the show, hope to see the bits I missed and the bits where the audio dropped out for me when you utube it. Great effort and nice to see real people donating their time and effort to truth and society. Nice to put a face to these people too.
Thanks to YOU Anthony for that excellent 25 hour program. Do get some R&R.
I can only hope that the many of presentations will become an educational material.
On the other hand I am more worried than I used to be and more worried than the rest of you. Despite all the data and facts clearly pointing out uncertainties with no reason for a hysterical response, the ideology of AGW continues unabated, albeit under different headlines. These people no longer look left or right, they don’t debate, they just follow their pseudo religious zeal and as far as I can see their political influence has not diminished a great deal. The issue of AGW, climate change, climate weirding, weather extremes, dirty weather or whatever name they come up with next needs more that the courage of Anthony or of the scientists who stood up yesterday, some of them potentially risking their careers.
One comment about the set-up. I think the best method was where the speaker said next slide and you, Anthony controlled the slide. My computer handled that presentation the best. With other presentations the slides were out of sync or did not move or the Audio cut-out. One presentation I really wanted to watch – Bob Tisdale’s, was missing 90% of the words. Donna Laframboise’s started out the same no audio with a few sounds here or there so I gave up since I knew you would have the presentations up on U-tube. – Can’t wait.
Thanks for all the long hours and hard work Anthony. It was a smashing success and you had a fantastic line up of presenters. I learned a lot.
I must say, I was so taken by Maurizio’s presentation. What a great example of what one man can do.
Gail Combs –
You mentioned Bob Tisdale’s presentation. No need to wait for Anthony: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lmjaNO5DD_Q
watched from start to finish. i like a no-sleep day every once in a while, so it was no problem.
loved how “unconcerned” kenjI was the whole time. wish he would teach my neighbour’s adorable dogs a thing or two about how to relax and not bark.
as someone said, graphics/text need to be much larger/stronger to work, especially for viewing thru the tv.
some presentations could be pre-recorded; can’t see why not.
the LOUDNESS of ads was not natural. i commented on this during the broadcast, because the real interference came in two segments in particular – those of marc morano and maurizio morabito. morano was spitting out facts by the millisecond and is a great communicator (even if his politics differ somewhat from mine) and maurizio was providing proof positive of bbc’s REAL CAGW bias. for those without scientific backgrounds, these were highly effective presentations.
during their presentations, doctored ads for blackmores vitamins, with their gentle soundtrack removed and replaced by screeching gamer-style sound effects, often accompanied by heavy metal music, would interrupt more often, approx every 10 to 15 minutes. commented online here and on joanne nova’s site that i would be phoning blackmores and, amazingly, soon afterwards, the blackmores ads stopped, tho an odd ad which included x-box, kinect, & other related, flashing logos, with the same screeching soundtrack, replaced them.
in the early presentations, the loud blackmores ad probably only appeared twice during a presentation, and no ads interrupted the pre-recorded docus when u took a break, anthony.
maybe it would be a good idea to make it an annual event, coinciding with or close to the anniversary of Climategate 1.
so proud of our aussie contributors, david and joanne. both were superb…and effective. bish, big mac, and everyone else had my complete attention as well.
biggest thanx to anthony and his family for giving him the space to continue his invaluable work on behalf of the scientific method.
You did fantastically well, omnilogos. A powerful bit.
Thank you Anthony. .
Fantastic job Anthony.
o We owe you the thanks, not the other way around (as noted upthread)
o I wouldn’t worry about “slickness”. The people who are persuaded by slickness aren’t going to be persuaded by facts and logic. Iron out the glitches, sure, but after that I think the focus should be on content quality.
o Training; I know you were probably too pressed for time to put presenters through brief training on their end of the interface, but I think this is important to do. Some people handle presentation difficulties better than others, but for most, their focus needs to be on their presentation, not on learning how to advance slides, etc.
Thank you, Anthony, for putting all this together (and thanks also to those who assisted). I watched as much as I could, but real life interfered and I missed many of your guests. I am really looking forward to your YouTube recordings so I can enjoy each presenter in full.
One hint, if I may: ask your guests to place the camera at the same level as their head so it doesn’t look as if they are looking down at the mike (which they obviously were).
IanM
Sorry. Couldn’t get my safe version of Adopey flash player to play the stream. Unless a blank screen was what I was supposed to see.
I’ll watch the videos on YouTube or Vimeo when they’re uploaded.
P.S. Get some sleep and take the dog for a walk/play before working on uploading the videos.
Thank you, Anthony, WUWT and ‘dirty’ scientists (I guess). I am learning a lot.
From Puebla, Mexico,
Armando
Anthony (or mods): Glenn Beck and The Blaze are fans of yours. He’s been building an online tv network from the ground up. In fact, he had Chris Tangey on the radio today. Beck asked Tangey if he could purchase the rights to the video, and Tangey said Beck could have them for free! My point in all this is, perhaps you could work with Beck/The Blaze next year, I’m guessing he’d give you access to the studios, servers, etc for cheap if not free.
Excellent job well done Anthony and guests. The lack of slickness criticism is not that important, what is important is that the WUWT-TV event occurred and is available for repeated viewing.
The video segments presented on YouTube will serve well for educating many more people, in particular linking in comments at national newspapers, magazines etc…
Jo Nova has great video personality which leant the show extra sparkle (plus she has truth on her side). Get her again next time! And may next time come soon!
Thank you , thank you, thank you!
Let’s win this war against this propaganda Gore bull sh*t.
Thank you, thank you , thank you!