While many enjoy the opportunity to be able to see and hear those they have not been able to share physical space with during lockdowns, the experience of working with such technology is not always a happy one.
Who hasn’t endured having their face frozen in some contorted position (why is it never an attractive pose?) struggled to connect, or had issues with mute?
There have been many hilarious moments including people inadvertently revealing their lack of dress, pets and children interrupting, participants not muting when they are making disparaging asides, and fuddy duddies presenting as potatoes or cats because someone has been messing with the technology and they do not know how to alter it. Some have never quite mastered the positioning thing, being too close or too far away, or showing more of their nasal passages than any non-medical person needed to see. There has also been the fun of critiquing the background. Are they all worthy tomes on that bookshelf, or a series of bodice rippers? Who would have thought that serious person would like such frivolous stuff?
As work in many areas moves to the home setting, Zoom and other applications are a fact of life, but using them can be stressful, particularly where houses have limited capacity for working spaces separate from the other uses.
Even the Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern, attempting to address her Facebook followers, gave up after being interrupted twice off-camera by a reluctant-to-bed small daughter. Who remembers what she was trying to say about Covid-19 plans? Perhaps the point which should have been noted is that work and home life needs greater separation, even when you are the PM.
Anxiety about your background and the possibility of interruption are just the beginning.
There is already some noise about Zoom fatigue with a study involving more than 10,000 self-selected people suggesting that women more than men are affected by it.
One issue cited was that women more than men think about how they appear, and many find staring at themselves online during meetings exhausting, something they would not be able to do in an in-person meeting. Perhaps not enough realise they could hide their self-view without obscuring the view of themselves to others. There is also the option of attending by voice only.
Having to look interested (not always achieved, it must be said) is another pressure, when in a real meeting the intensity of scrutiny would not be the same and some participants would feel able, if not to nod off, at least to indulge in a daydream or two.
Adding to the tension is that it is harder to read non-verbal cues in a remote setting. Normal silences are likely to be confused with glitches with the technology. Informal preamble and opportunities for casual catch-ups are lacking in online meetings.
There is understandably some concern about how power works in video-conferencing meetings when those chairing can mute participants. Dunedin city councillor Lee Vandervis, who is unable to attend council meetings in person because it would contravene the council’s vaccination status rules, is not happy with the option of joining remotely. He had issues with being cut off and muted in earlier virtual council meetings.
It has been suggested the medium allows for greater concentration on what is being said because it eliminates some of the biases associated with physical presence. Our observation is it does not seem to stop people speaking off-topic just for the sake of hearing their own voice.
It will be important to properly evaluate the pros and cons of the long-term use of video-conferencing, but during the silly season let’s just enjoy being off-line if we can.
