Hybrid and Online Sessions That Are Not Worse

Hybrid events usually mean the in-person event happens and the remote attendees watch a degraded version of it. They can hear about half the questions, they cannot ask one, and nobody in the room remembers they are there.

Doing it properly is not expensive, and it does require deciding that the remote participants are participants. For a concrete operational comparison, Monitask explains employee attendance tracking software in practical terms.

The decision first

Do it properly or say you are not doing it.

A camera at the back of a room with no dedicated microphone, no question channel and nobody monitoring it is worse than an honest statement that the event is in person. It consumes registration fees and produces frustration.

And say which you are doing, publicly, before people commit money and time.

What "properly" requires

A microphone that captures the speaker, into the stream. Room audio from a laptop at the back does not work.

A microphone for questions from the floor. This is the failure people notice most: the speaker is audible and every question is inaudible, so remote attendees hear half a conversation.

Slides shared directly, not filmed. A camera pointed at a projector screen produces something nobody can read.

A way for remote attendees to ask questions, and a chair who actually monitors it.

Someone whose job is the remote participants, per session. Not the chair, who is managing the room. This is the single decision that determines whether hybrid works, and it costs one person's attention.

A visible display of the remote chat in the room, if possible, so the in-person audience knows they exist.

Running the session

The chair takes remote questions in rotation, deliberately — one from the room, one from the queue. Without an explicit rotation, the room dominates.

Announce at the start that there are remote attendees, and how many. It changes behaviour.

Speakers face the camera occasionally, and are told beforehand.

Repeat every question, always. See chairing a session.

Do not use physical props or gestures that do not translate — pointing at the screen, writing on a whiteboard that is out of frame.

Watch the chat for technical problems. If the stream has dropped, the remote attendees cannot tell you by any other route.

Fully online events

Different from hybrid and in some ways easier, because everyone is in the same medium.

Shorter days. A schedule that works in a room does not work on a screen. Fewer sessions, longer breaks, and consider spreading over more days.

Shorter talks, and more discussion.

Time zones. An event scheduled for the organisers' working day excludes half the world. Rotating session times, or repeating key sessions, or recording — pick one deliberately rather than defaulting.

Do something about the social part, or accept that it is absent. Unstructured video calls do not reproduce corridor conversation; small structured groups sometimes do.

Recording and its consequences. Recording increases access and it changes what people say. Ask permission, say what happens to the recordings, and consider leaving the discussion unrecorded even where the talks are.

Why it matters beyond convenience

It is the most significant accessibility provision available, and it also serves people constrained by cost, caring responsibilities, visa refusal, disability and travel restrictions.

Those are not marginal groups. An in-person-only event systematically excludes early-career researchers without travel funding, people at institutions in lower-income countries, and people who cannot travel for health or family reasons.

Which is the argument for doing it properly rather than as an afterthought: the people it serves are the ones already least likely to be in the room.

See accessibility at an academic event.

The costs

Technical support for the sessions. Frequently available from the host institution.

Equipment — a decent microphone, a camera that works, a screen for the remote chat. Modest.

A person per session. The main cost, and it can be a volunteer or a student, credited and briefed.

Captioning, if provided, which is a real cost and should be budgeted at the start.

Do not charge remote attendees the in-person rate. They are not consuming catering or venue, and charging as if they were is noticed.

When not to do it

When you cannot staff it. An unstaffed hybrid is worse than none.

When the event is fundamentally about the in-person interaction — a small workshop where the value is the room. Say so, and consider whether a separate online session could serve people who cannot attend.

When the venue makes it impossible and cannot be changed.

In all these cases, say so early, so people can decide.

The short version

Decide properly or decline honestly. A camera at the back with no microphone is worse than nothing.

One person per session whose job is the remote participants. That single decision determines whether it works.

Repeat every question, share slides directly, and rotate between room and queue.

Online events need shorter days, shorter talks and a time zone decision made deliberately.

And it is the largest accessibility provision available — the people it serves are the ones least likely to be in the room already.

For an independent authoritative reference, consult ACM conference resources for professional guidance on academic events.