What:   Story on NPR about the use of video conferencing in immigration courts.
Posts to which it is related:  Supportive and Critical Communication in Virtual Teams, Lessons from Victorian Technology
Bottom line:  This piece demonstrates some of the issues that arise when a form of virtual collaboration is used strictly for efficiency with no adjustments made for interacting virtually instead of face-to-face.  Immigration courts are struggling, like many other organizations, to control costs.  They have recently increased their use of conference calling for court proceedings – people on trial are conferenced in.  Their lawyers often choose to be in the court with the judge, though they may choose to be with their client instead.  Because it’s immigration court, translators are often needed as well.  The NPR piece reports that translators are commonly teleconferenced into a phone on the judge’s desk.  Imagine the logistics of communicating with that set up!  And imagine an “efficient” trial with those logistics when a person is trying to plead their case for asylum.  We know that it takes extra effort to make the human connection when conferencing.  Immigration lawyers are concerned that the increased use of video- and tele-conferencing is creating an obstacle to proper legal proceedings.

What: A VentureBeat piece about the TimeBridge conference call system with improved features.
Posts to which it is related:  Wonderland: A Tool for Online Collaboration
Bottom line:  Maybe what the immigration courts need is a system that works better logistically.  Certainly that would be a step in the right direction.  TimeBridge has the right idea – their product includes not only conferencing capabilities, but two other features to simplify virtual collaboration.  Each person’s availability is now available to others.  This is intended to make the scheduling process simpler.  This VentureBeat piece seems to be singing its praises.  And it seems likely that as the logistics of virtual collaboration are made simpler, there is more room for that extra effort to go to creating social connections in this communication medium.

What:  Science Daily article about the difference between conferencing and face-to-face discussion.
Posts to which it is related:  Spread YourVirtual Smile, Really
Bottom line:  In this post, that references a Management Science article, we learn that videoconferencing appears to have an effect on communication.  According to the study, people are more likely to base decisions on how much they like the other person in videoconferencing; this is in contrast to face-to-face interactions, where decisions tend to be based more on facts or information.  The study was conducted in a medical setting, but it seems likely that this effect would hold in similar decision making situations.  For example, this has implications for the use of videoconferencing in immigration courts, as described above.