In the midst of a global pandemic we have no choice but to think of the future and ways to improve it. There has been a lot of controversy around the implementation of 5G in cities, from pictures of dead birds to forming anti-5G groups and petitions to ban the 5G implementation. We remember the drama around the possibility of computers taking over the world in 00:00:00 01.01.2000 and that didn’t happen. We remember people speculating that mobile phones cause cancer and that was also proven to be a myth. Cancer Research UK reassures us (as well as literally any 5G engineer) that 5G is just a higher frequency wave, but it is not enough to damage our DNA.

So, having that out of our way we can discuss the benefits that we can experience with 5G and to understand why “sky’s the limit” when event organisers adopt this technology

1. More reliable and high-quality streaming 

Having in mind that it is expected of 5G to provide 100 times faster download speed than 4G, event planners can stop worrying about buffering video streams. This can be beneficial in two ways: reduce costs of guest speakers and cut carbon emissions by not flying certain speakers and include more delegates.

5G will allow event planners to book any speaker around the world and it could be done from the comfort of the speaker’s home. This will allow conferences with a tighter budget to invite key speakers who would be otherwise too expensive or just don’t have 3-4 days to travel overseas for example and would like to avoid experience jet lag.

The same applies for delegates who cannot physically participate or would like to attend a specific seminar that concerns them the most. If we tackle the latter, this will give delegates more flexibility in terms of time, space and funding.

2. Increased security

R. Borgaonkar, a research scientist at the Norwegian tech analysis firm SINTEF Digital, says that “5G has really good promise for security”. Once fully implemented 5G will include anti-tracking and spoofing features that will make it harder for bad actors on a network to track and manipulate individual device connections. Another thing that 5G will introduce is the idea of “slicing” – segmenting the system in various different networks that can be managed and operated separately. This means that there will be no universal way to access the network, which will make 5G devices harder to manipulate.

3. Optimise the use of event wearables

One of the most futuristic gadgets is Virtual Reality (VR). VR conferences provide event organisers with the opportunity to run their event rather completely remotely and online. This is a valuable solution in times like this, when social distancing and limited travel is the new norm. So, rather than cancel or postpone the event, event professionals can take advantage of the technology that we have and 5G will only make this transition easier. A recent example of an event like this is the Virtual Vive Ecosystem Conference – V2EC 2020: the world’s first fully virtual conference in VR. 

Having VR conferences can supplement having the main conference if circumstances allow it. Some delegates may have access to one another before the conference takes place and smaller work groups can be created depending on interests. This allows delegates to extract more of their interaction with other attendees or speakers, as VR doesn’t require a hotel booking or taking a flight and is not limited within the conference’s timeframe. VR also provides a better way to visually present your ideas or write key points in the air as you speak – like having a whiteboard with you at all times. Information presented both verbally and through image is proved to be better retained.

4. Tailored information

5G will provide a secure and accessible network for both event organisers and attendees, which will facilitate the data collection process under the GDPR laws. By having more information about delegates, event designers will be able to use technology as a medium to provide more tailored and curated information to the delegates. This will enhance the attendee’s engagement and satisfaction and will make the event stand out. The future of events is to have bespoke experiences at brand activations, conferences and just ordinary meetings and 5G can help event organisers satisfy their client’s needs. 

Cut the cost of Wi-Fi

This one sounds obvious, but is a big step for event venues. Mika Skarp, CEO at Cloud Street, says:

“Now, instead of settling for a dumb pipe to a sluggish and unreliable wireless access point via WiFi, or last generation cellular, a 5G base station will provide coverage from 100s of meters to 10s of kilometers (depending on population density), at some 100 times the capacity or latency that even the fastest wireless connections can provide.””

The reduced cost can be then used on other aspects of the event planning such as Social Media presence. 

We need to embrace this new technology and remember that digitalisation of events is just a complimentary feature to attending physical events. It is not a threat or a substitute, but rather it can expand the attendee’s experience and can open new pathways for event organisers. 5G is here to stay and we as event professionals have to be on top of it.

A recommendation for event and venue managers

Events are an easy target for terrorist attacks. Extremists have shifted their focus from embassies, army bases or planes towards nightclubs, arenas and public open spaces. Choosing “lifestyle” targets guarantees a broader media coverage and the spread of ideas promoted by terrorists. We can see examples of this trend from recent years: attacks have occurred in at the Louvre museum in France or the Christmas market terrorist attack in Berlin.

Such an event was the Ariana Grande’s Manchester arena concert, where in 2017 22 people, including children, have been killed and 59 injured in a suicide bombing at a crowded, the most deadly attack in Britain in a decade. It is estimated that in the aftermaths of the tragic event more than 800 have deep psychological and/ or physical traumas. Could this have been prevented and how do we, as event managers, guarantee the security of all attendants?

This terrorist attack has sparked the conversation about how to improve security measures and implement consistent anti-terrorist measures across all events and venues in the UK. Figen Murray is the mother of one of Manchester Arena’s bombing victims: the 22-year-old Martyn Hett who never came home after the concert. Now Murray is striving to create a lasting legacy for her son, by trying to implement a piece of legislation representing a common standard of counter terrorism precautions, called Martyn’s law.

Martyn’s law has the support of Mayor of Manchester, the Prime Minister, Home Secretary and Security Minister. The proposal has gained the attention of national and international event professionals, being one of the main educational sessions at the 2020 International Confex exhibition for event organisers. Murray and former National Counter-Terrorism Co-ordinator Nick Aldworth had the chance to discuss the importance of venue security during their panel.

What does the law include and how can it be implemented?

Martyn’s law consists of five requirements:

• A requirement that spaces and places to which the public have access engage with freely available counter-terrorism advice and training.
• A requirement for those places to conduct vulnerability assessments of their operating places and spaces.
• A requirement for those places to mitigate the risks created by the vulnerabilities.
• A requirement for those places to have a counter-terrorism plan.
• A requirement for local authorities to plan for the threat of terrorism.

It all comes down to money, as these measures could be implemented by including increased physical security, training, incident response plans and exercises for staff on what to do during an attack. But even though it may be expensive to implement,

“this legislation has the potential to make a significant impact on public security, improving the situation for people as they go about their daily lives” says Matt Maer, director of security and resilience at Canary Wharf Group.

In order for this legislation to be successfully implemented, the Government would need to keep an eye on security fees, as when demand increases pricing increases as well. Charging higher fees for security for major events can negatively impact event organisers. Unexpected costs can make the implementation of Martyn’s law principles difficult and unattainable.

When can Martyn’s law be implemented?

There is no timetable set by the Government yet, but event organisers can be proactive with their attitude towards implementing Martyn’s law. The first thing that Murray urges to be implemented is having tougher ‘airport-style’ security checks that could be introduced at public venues. Although this measure sounds logical, this can result into long queues outside the venue, making the group of people an easy target. Because of that venues need to have sufficient staff and training in order to do the search in a timely manner. Security employees at some arenas and stadiums have already operating this way and this has to be an example for all other event venues.

Manchester City Council in the absence of a mandated legislation would implement Martyn’s law principles through tighter licensing criteria for venues. All venues have a risk assessment, which includes health and safety regulations and an emergency plan, but most of them lack a plan for terrorist attacks. So, the first thing that a venue manager would need to do is to fill out this gap and provide the necessary training to their staff. The event organiser on the other hand would need to make sure that the venue that they hire has the necessary papers to prove that a training has taken place.

Event organisers, just like Murray, also acknowledge the need to develop and implement coherent training for event professionals, that is not only standardised but also effective. Event professionals recognise the need to increase their understanding and share that this knowledge hasn’t been embedded into their training. The solution for this is for event organisers to work hand in hand with institutions such as universities or councils that can provide adequate education and training.

What measures are you implementing when preparing for an event?

What are the trends towards boycotting hosting the Games?

Recently there has been a decline in cities bidding to host the Olympics. With the introduction of referendums, people in democratic countries are presented with a choice and their opinion is clear: locals do not want the Olympic Games to take place in their city. But what could be the reason?

A mega event like the Olympics allows the country to become a hub for international meetings and exhibitions, which later boosts the local economy. The Big Four emerging economies or the BRIC counties (Brazil, Russia, India, China) are in top 40 in hosting international meetings per year as a result of hosting a mega event all thanks to the investment and infrastructure that mega events bring.

Only two cities have bid for the upcoming summer Olympic Games, compared to 11 in 2003. Consequently, the International Olympic Committee (IOC) unprecedently granted the rights to host the Games to both cities of Paris and Los Angeles in 2024 and 2028 accordingly, instead of one city at a time.

The same tendencies are observed with the Winter Olympics. Out of the 6 countries that have initially showed interest in the 2022 Winter Olympics, all 4 European countries withdrew before the end, leaving the choice between China and Kazakhstan, Beijing being the winner.

But why is there a drastic demise in popularity in hosting the Olympics?

Despite the benefits, people in many of the cities where potentially the Olympics can take place, have voted against when presented with the opportunity. Referendums in Budapest, Davos, Hamburg, Innsbruck, Krakow and Munich have all been negative towards the Olympics.  

The only exception where a referendum was in favour of hosting the Games was in Oslo, but the bid was scrapped anyway due to political controversies with the Norwegian government.

Some of the major concerns revolve around the cost of the event, often exceeding the estimated spending by billions. There is often a substantial disparity between the eventual costs of hosting and what was projected, an excellent example is the fact that London invested in total £8.92bn while having $2.4bn initial budget.  

Overpaying for producing the Olympic Games is common and this is due to the unrealistic demands of the IOC. The rising cost is in connection with the bidding process, as cities wanting to win are presenting the most extravagant proposals in order to do so. But this creates an unreachable standard for host cities.

“In order to win these Games, the hosts are promising too much to begin with. That’s how they win, and the IOC has to work with them because in many cases the host cities don’t know what the real impacts are, they don’t know what the costs are going to be,” said VanWynsberghe, a professor and sustainability expert at the University of British Columbia.

Financial burden is the main reason why Boston’s community opposed to the 2024 Olympics bid in 2013 and with a budget of £6000 for the campaign the £11.7m bid was cancelled.

Hosting the Olympics in a city without infrastructure proves to be wasteful and non-sustainable economically, creating “white elephants” – expensive facilities that are never used after the Games. It makes sense that if a city did not have an arena or a stadium prior the Games, it would not need one afterwards.

With no clear idea for how to use the facilities after the Games, those type of buildings become abandoned and ironically illustrate the economic hardship. From neglected facilities in Sarajevo (1984 Winter Games) to the most recent example with Rio, where sporting facilities and accommodation in the Olympic village are falling apart as soon as 6 months after the Games.

What is IOC’s reaction?

It was only from 2000 onwards that the IOC requested a legacy planning from each applicant as part of the bid process. Even though those were delivered for the bid, the organising committees did not follow them, as their duty is limited to producing the ‘perfect Games’.

As a result of the declining number of cities wanting to host the Olympics, the IOC is starting to implement some counter measures. In 2018 the ICO launched a project called the New Norm consisting of 118 reforms that aim to save hosting cities as much as £770m by amending the requirements to host the Games.

The improvements include an easier application process, which will make bidding less expensive, focusing on prosperity of the host city and sustainability, while trying to use of existing venues and generally ensure that the Olympics adapt to the city, not the other way around.

However, this move has been criticised for being a publicity stunt because of the enormous marketing budget (£30m). Experts are concerned that broader measures are needed to convince ordinary people that the benefits will outweigh the negatives.

Julles Boykoff who is a professor at Pacific University and studies the Olympics comments on the situation:

“Serious citizen concern has emerged in prospective Olympic cities as awareness about the significant downsides of hosting the Games have received more attention. This puts the IOC in a real bind. We’re approaching the point where the Olympics only remain popular as a general idea floating in the ether of the global imaginary, but when specific cities consider hosting, alarm bells go off in the general population.”

Future of the Olympic games

Since there is looming danger to not have a host city for future Olympics, the IOC’s future is put in jeopardy. To avoid having the Games in authoritarian countries only, where referendum is not an option and there are issues with human rights and freedom of press, the IOC would need to drastically change their approach.

The ideal option would be for the IOC to actively support the host cities and care about the legacy of the greatest sports event by providing expertise from past events and having manageable expectations. The whole point of having the Olympics is to bring people together, but IOC’s attitude has led to people uniting against the Games.

Should cultural symbols be banned from festivals?

“Seeing people who aren’t from that culture dressed in that way, embracing it and understanding it from the food, to the language, to the music. That for me is a truer expression than putting a bindi on at a festival because you think it looks cool.”

What is culture and cultural appropriation?

According to the Cambridge dictionary the term culture means ‘the way of life, especially the general customs and beliefs, of a particular group of people at a particular time’. But doesn’t that mean that culture changes if that group of people mixes with another and when time progresses? In this case, is mixing cultures wrong or it could lead to fair exchange and the occurrence of a new one?

Fashion designers have been faced with backlash over cultural appropriation numerous times in the past few years. Dior has used Jennifer Lawrence for a campaign that has been inspired by Mexican heritage, Vogue has presented the top model Kendal Jenner with an afro hairstyle and the list goes on. But the festival scene is different, because a festival provides a safe space to be creative with one’s image and to wear and explore something new.

Nevertheless, festival goers have been publicly shamed for insensitive cultural appropriation. So much so, that some festivals have banned certain cultural symbols such as the American Indian headdresses at Glastonbury, bindis (a coloured dot worn on the centre of the forehead) and braids at Coachella.  Festivalgoers would need to reconsider their look if they have chosen to integrate some of those symbols.

Cultural symbols out of context

But why is this the case, why some cultures get more offended than others when an outsider wears a piece of their heritage? Well, the problem is when a person at a festival decides to wear for example braids for a day and this is considered beautiful and creative by society. The situation with black people is different though: often wearing braids is their only choice, otherwise they risk not being accepted from society. There are still schools that ban black people to wear their natural afro hair and in some companies this hairstyle is considered inappropriate.

Some cultural symbols need to be rightfully obtained, for example the headdress is a spiritual item reserved for elders and even native Americans cannot wear it, unless they spend their life trying to earn it. So, imagine the surprise of native Americans when they see pictures of bad imitations on Instagram, when their symbol of strength and bravery is used as a fashion accessory.  This can be compared to wearing a jacket with military medals as a fashion statement without having earned them.

Wearing those symbols on festivals and later posting pictures on social media platforms highlights the inequalities between privileged people who can get away with having these symbols for a day to have fun and people representing those cultures who are getting judged for their skin or heritage traits.

Although many people rightfully feel culturally appropriated, we live in an oversensitive society. Often there are cases of cultural appropriation shaming, which are coming not from the culture in question but from people outside of this community.  There have been public meltdowns after Katy Perry’s kimono at the American Music Awards and Karlie Kloss’s Japan-Themed Vogue Shoot, however the people who reacted abruptly were actually not the Japanese but white Americans.

The power of music festivals

Music festivals have the enormous power to challenge what is accepted and to make societal changes. So, by embracing other people’s cultures we can switch from appropriation to appreciation. It wouldn’t be easy but there is a way to do it. Appropriation may be defined as ignorance, while appreciation is linked with understanding of the particular culture. The main concern of people who feel their culture has been appropriated is when no credit is given back to the culture from where this symbol has been taken from.

Banning those symbols can be considered as a form of censorship, but the debate goes further than that. Culture is always a part of context and when a particular symbol is taken out of this context it diminishes its value, whilst simultaneously erasing its cultural significance. Meanings depend on respecting the views of those concerned, so what matters is the subject of appropriation – the person whose traditions are being used.

The most sensitive cultural symbols need to be prohibited at music festivals, but not all symbols are that obvious, for example some patterns are derive from movements or tribes. In this case, the best way for a festival goer to proceed is to try and educate themselves. This can be achieved with asking questions to the vendor of clothing/ accessory or a simple Google search can show an item’s origin. Then it is up to the individual to decide of it is appropriate to incorporate this symbol into their festival outfit and how to show appreciation for this culture, rather than appropriate it.

What can event manager do?

What festival event managers can do is to familiarise their customers with this sensitive topic. This can be part of the pre-event production and it can be incorporated into the purchasing process and information about cultural appropriation can be its own section on the website. This information page can include trends that may be considered offensive and most importantly explain why this particular symbol is important and the reason why it may be inappropriate to wear it as a fashion fad.