I’ve been really torn about whether to say more in this discussion or not because I don’t particularly want to jeopardize being invited to speak again. I’ve also enjoyed the conversation that happened here and I didn’t want to interrupt.

My general philosophy is that if I know something I can share with someone else who doesn’t know it, I’m likely to teach that person. That’s one reason why I’ve been doing a lot of this speaking. That being said, I do have real financial limitations about what’s possible. And sometimes, it can seem like speaking everywhere for free can jeopardize speakers. It’s kinda like how we demand realistic salaries for our professional work. But slightly different.

I stumbled across Hugh Macleod’s views on the issue and have to say I appreciate and agree with what he says.

“There’s a concern that letting speakers in for free or for a reduced rate means more members will want to speak. This can lead to lower quality presentations and lost conference revenue for the association.”

You know, I don’t think this is it. I think the main concern from the ALA folks is both that professional librarians “should” be members of ALA and thus shoudld be coming to the conference anyhow, added to the “it’s an honor to serve” analysis. The ALA Council list went back and forth in a really interesting fashion over the past few days with responses going from the completely reasonable to the [in my opinion only] crazy insane. I think there is a schism between the world of librarianship where we all do one sort of job and belong to one association, and the new complicated world of information management where a lot of us do many different things and have specialized organizations and obligations outside of just ALA.

I honestly don’t mind speaking for absolute free [and registering] at a conference I was going to go to anyhow, but that choice should be mine to make. If I’m not planning to go, I shouldn’t have to pay.

This a pet peeve of mine, but more so with local conferences/speaking engagements — both with library and non-library groups. There is the sense that you should be honored to present and feel that the networking opportunity is enough “payment.” But there is prep time, travel time, etc. It seems like any group that asks someone to come and speak should provide some honorarium, no matter how far you traveled.

[On the good side, I actually did a presentation locally a couple years ago and was amazed to be handed a $100 check when it was over! Plus I got dinner along with good conversation.]

As for national/international conferences, what they do can vary widely. I, too, have paid the conference fee at SLA in years when I’ve also presented. I think it would be nice if the conference would do something as a thank-you. Perhaps taking a percentage off the conference registration fee?

Some conferences will give a complimentary one-day registration (SLA does this actually), which can be good. I’ve taken good advantage of that at NYLA.

BTW I learned two years ago to really think twice before applying to speak at a conference and to especially look at the travel costs. In one instance, speaking at the conference in Fredericton, NB was expensive. (We used a couple tricks to lower the cost, but still…)

I have found that it is common practice for academic conferences to require speakers to pay like everyone else and business conferences to give free admission to speakers. I am not sure of the logic here but it seems unfair to academics who are already likely to earn less than business speakers. Perhaps they will get institutional support to attend but that is not always the case. About half of the business speakers are self-employed and many at large businesses no longer get company support because of tighter budgets. But this not make them different. It think it is just a matter of expectations in different “matkets.”

All the examples are in the Library and Information world. What about other professions? Do chemists or physicists have to pay to speak at their conferences? Or doctors, or lawyers, or nurses, or accountants??

Anyone know?

I always assumed the professional-organization policy was a matter of conflict of interest and ethics, but it may boil down to the same thing.

I guess I’ve been fortunate in that I never believed I *was* an expert in anything, and never had the chutzpah to try to establish myself as a speaker; I think at least 95% of the speeches I’ve done have been by invitation. And 95% of them have had expenses paid, with probably 90% involving an honorarium. Maybe that’s why I don’t have any speeches on the horizon–but I could never handle nine presentations in one season in any case! I envy those with the stamina for all that travel and speaking. Sort of. And wonder how long you can keep doing it on your dime (for occasions where you’re not a member of the group you’re speaking to).

“There’s a concern that letting speakers in for free or for a reduced rate means more members will want to speak.”
And this is a *good* thing — there’s limited time and this would increase competition for a limited number of spots. Fewer (in terms of %) sessions would be accepted and maybe the overall quality would be better. or at least the abstracts would be better
Anyway ASIST is pretty broke but I think SLA could sponsor the conference registration of certain speakers– especially those who give classes like you did. PLA has money, I think they should at least give reduced conference registrations since the speaker will have to pay for transportation and lodging.