Feedback from clients has been very positive. Anecdotal evidence suggests that the event delivered on its promise to “strengthen client relationships, and enhance our reputation as a firm with strong national reach.”

During the event, questions were taken from the live audience at the Commonwealth Club, and 20 or so questions came in nationwide via e-mail.

PROBLEMS

There were technical problems, too: “The [web] registration forms were set up in popups, and popup blocker software interfered with many of our invitees’ ability to self-register.”

Her advice to other law firms: “Think beyond the typical PR you might do with a local event. Offering this on a national basis created many more opportunities than we would normally have.”

LIVE OR TAPED?

Live webcast:
Live coverage makes a meeting into an event! The presence of cameras injects a sense of significance. If it’s covered live, it must be important! This adds marketing pizzaz, and heightens the electricity of the moment. Major disadvantages: Risk of flubs or Internet congestion. Also, since the camera is tethered to a computer and communications line, in practice the shoot is limited to a single location. Consequently, a live webcast cannot handle much camera movement, and outdoors coverage is difficult.

Taped webcast:
Recorded events are safer, and less risky. They can be edited which is a huge advantage. Flaws can be removed; music, titles, and effects may be added. The final cut can use the best of multiple takes, mix scenes/locations/backgrounds, and “color correction” can reduce some of the limitations of video.

Taping is much easier and more flexible, initially requiring only a camera. You can shoot footage, then edit it into an “on-demand” webcast. Even difficult events such as a boat ride, baseball game, or tour are not a problem. Because editing can improve footage enormously, taped webcasts typically provide a much higher quality viewing experience.

In sum, live events have an immediacy and realism that magnifies their impact. By their nature, however, live events cannot be edited — the broadcast is raw, flubs and all. Taped events can be improved by deleting or re-recording the bad parts, inter-cutting scenes, and by adding graphics, music, text, etc. Webcasting live increases equipment requirements, raising costs; editing improves quality and control but may add cost and delay to taped webcasts.

Certain events lend themselves to live coverage, others are best taped for “on-demand” viewing:

• Morrison & Foerster webcast a seminar about the CAN-SPAM law in January, 2003. Over 400 people participated in a live webcast which broadcast audio and slides (no video).

• A biweekly live video program, WilentzTV.com, was launched last year by Wilentz, Goldman & Spitzer, of Woodbridge, NJ. Their “Internet TV channel” covers topics such as “Top 10 Tips When Getting Divorced,” “HIPAA Compliance Made Simple,” and “Vioxx: Do You Have a Case,” as mentioned in my December column.

• Office and campus tours can’t be done live due to the limited scope of a camera tethered to a computer. For example, as I discussed in my December column, Washington University School of Law offers a perky 1-minute campus tour on-demand at http://law.wustl.edu/qtlifewuls - QuickTime required. So does Duke Law School, which hosts a 3-minute video on-demand at www.law.duke.edu/webcast/virtualtour.html - RealPlayer required.

• See other examples of on-demand webcasts in our nationwide roundup of law firm webcasts at our bullet reviews and links page.