Pollstar: Scientists at the medical center of Halle University in Germany conducted a scientific experiment at the Quarterback Immobilien Arena in Leipzig, Aug. 22, in order to gather data on crowd management that could provide useful for live event professionals.
German singer and songwriter Tim Bendzko performed a real concert on the day, during which different crowd behavior scenarios were simulated. The results are now in and were presented during an Oct. 29 press conference.
9 comments:
Although this research sounds very promising, I remember another article with a similar experiment happening a few weeks ago which didn’t have conclusive evidence if events would contribute to the spread of COVID-19 which makes me question the validity of this article. Although I would be very excited if us theatre people could start making in person theatre again, I also would like us to start theatre safely and not contribute to the spread of COVID-19. I hope that we conduct more research into the correlation of live performances and the spread of COVID-19 which would bring us more conclusive evidence. In the meantime, we do know that events taking place outside do not contribute to the spread of COVID-19 as much so I think it would be great if we start planting outside events which could be performed whenever restrictions and the cold are lifted.
Let’s start with this quote which states that the Professor that helmed and took credit for this “useful” and “pioneer”ing study “left out the fact that the professionals working in this sector have been coming up with safe, sound, and scientifically approved concepts for months now.” I think this provides some important context to the rest of the article. This was one study, and while the results are encouraging, I think the way it’s being presented not only in this article but in other coverage is highly misleading. Their primary focuses were on airflow and contact instances. Their volunteers were all aware that they were being studied, and understood what the desired and positive outcome would be (that events could be reopened) which meant that it is highly likely they all played by the rules. Additionally, there was extra money and therefore resources (stewards, or in other words, hall monitors) to conduct the study and to make sure everyone was actually playing by the rules. The article states “Last, and most importantly, they found, that if event promoters stick to hygiene concepts, their events will have little to hardly any impact on the pandemic.” This is where the crux of the issue with not involving actual event professionals comes in. While it’s all well and good to say that as long as the event promoters play by the rules, the show can go on, you’re completely taking the actual human nature of the audience out of it. The article states that 90% of folks were ok with wearing masks, but we’ve learned through this pandemic that 10% is who actually matters. I’d like to see a study that takes a little more realistic approach, and maybe includes the professionals who work in the industry next time.
So, there are a few takeaways from this article. First, they said that the number of critical contacts wasn’t that high, but that’s not a number. What kind of scientific study leads with “not that high” and not an actual percentage. That’s not how you generate faith in you study. I presume that every event would have some contact and that if that contact featured a COVID-infected patient then that event would lead to more people contracting that disease. Therefore, if we can’t get that number to below whatever we expect from like a grocery then I don’t think we’re ready to reopen theaters. Second, it seems that every theater construction or renovation from now on will feature major investments in air filtration and circulation. This is great news because an empty theater early in the morning is always freezing and if we can circulate some warm air, I would be very grateful. Lastly, I just think we need to acknowledge that any of these studies are inherently flawed because these participants are not acting how we all know entitled patrons act. They’re going to lie about being, they’re going to take off their mask, and they’re going to gather when they shouldn’t and I don’t think its fair to ushers to have to deal with that.
I can’t help but to wonder how necessary experiments like this- one that took 2 months to produce solid results, are in terms of COVID-19. Optimistically thinking, a vaccine will come about soon enough and the virus will start to fade away. When this happens, all of these things that scientist and technologist are spending lots of time and money on will be useless. Don’t get me wrong, right now, we need certain things. We need new ways to safely go about our everyday lives and this involves lots of technology and modern science. But these need to be immediate things. Things that can be figured out and implemented quickly. Not necessarily things that will take months to develop, eventually becoming useless as the virus get better. Though, no one is one hundred percent sure that a vaccine will be introduced soon and that it will be one hundred percent effective. So everything that I just said maybe be invalid. Also, I do recognize how useful and necessary this research work is. Finding out the frequency of contacts and the impact of critical contact is useful in many scenarios and can be good information to have beyond COVID-19. So I do appreciate this work and the information gathered.
I have seen a few articles about this experiment at Leipzig now, and I feel like every author ignores a critical problem in this experiment: Everyone in the crowd was on their best behavior. Not only did these folks know they were being studied, they were instructed on how to act for each phase of the experiment. Obviously, this is likely somewhat different behavior than if these folks were to actually go to a concert, in the same way that I drive a bit more cautiously and don't speed when there is a cop car in the lane next to me. Further, the idea that "events can take place even in a pandemic situation under certain conditions" is something of a silly thing to say. Yeah, of course they can happen under "certain conditions". That doesn't mean that those conditions are likely to be met, or even conceivable until things calm down. I also find it incredibly frustrating that Professor Willingmann said that "the event industry needed insights and concepts with which to realize concerts, festivals or exhibitions in a responsible manner despite Corona" while ignoring the fact that industry professionals "have been coming up with safe, sound, and scientifically approved concepts for months now." It is a common trend for people outside the entertainment industry to think they can just waltz in and fix everything because they've decided that they know how it all works. The sheer arrogance of those people really grinds my gears, and their ignorance is no excuse.
I am not sure that these results are much of a surprise, but it is interesting. It makes me think of AEA’s requirements, which include stringent rules around how many times the HVAC flushes the system. The dangers of COVID indoors are mitigated by swapping (potentially virus-bearing) indoor air with (probably safe) outdoor as often as possible. This article describes a proof of concept in which a highly sophisticated HVAC system can manage the air flow sufficiently to prevent the spread of the virus. Most small venues have only basic HVAC controls, and certainly do not have pinpoint control like the high-tech venue described in the article. It is going to be extremely difficult to achieve the AEA requirements without massively expensive upgrades. I would like to see more studies of less sophisticated venues, so that we can find out the bottom shelf of what we can do safely. Also, not for nothing, but this all only works if everyone on all sides of the show commits to the safety measures.
I am glad to see an article like this come out. It feels like everyone is so afraid to see people that it feels impossible to even get data for many Coronavirus related things in which data would be helpful. At the very least, I am very glad that somewhere in the world, which happens to be Germany, is performing experiments to figure out just how to actually move forward. I also appreciate the comments in the article referring to politics because it is very true. Politics has a very different goal then everyone else: to get the position. Everyone in the world wants to move forward in some way but politics is proving to be resistance, although necessary in some cases, it isn’t always helpful. The other aspect is that this article doesn’t pull any real data from the experiment. It simply summarizes it, which can be helpful but not in this case. Have some numbers or factors would have been a great addition to learn about, or at the very least a link to where we can find that information.
This is all well and good assuming of course that the venue in question has a “state of the art ventilation system.” Most venues do not, especially older venues that have not been upgraded in a number of years. The other factor is that venues are different. Theatres often have fabric seats where a virus or germ can land from one person and be shot into the air by someone else. While we know a great deal about the coronavirus, there is still a lot we don’t. Especially since it still affects everyone differently. Don’t get me wrong, this is an important first step in being able to go live again, but there are so many variables that are being missed here with this experiment. Germany and England right now are facing a second wave and more lockdowns. The UK just announced more lockdown protocols. I understand the need for these tests and experiments, but without a vaccine, it is way too soon to be talking reopening.
I feel like it was only a matter of time before an article like this an a study came onto the green page. And that being said I don’t think the results of the article are all that surprising. I think the specifics of what’s needed from a venue and what kind of HVAC system they need is of course going to be important and people are going to need to be clear about what they need for specific venues. But as Chase said above I think AEA’s requirements and other union and employee requirements might be outside of the price range for many live event venues. Venue’s aren’t things that are updated on a regular basis outside of major us sporting venues and HVAC systems are something that I imagine are updated even less than say consumer interacted portions of the venue. This is important and good to see the data for going forward but I don’t think this gives us all the answers for what we will need.
Post a Comment