Subscribe
Share
Share
Embed
In this episode of the Convene Podcast, the team discusses how recent U.S. policies and funding cuts are disrupting the business events industry. From international travel challenges to scientific censorship and declining attendance, hear what’s changing—and what it means for planners, speakers, and global collaboration.
Links:
Get News Junkie: https://www.pcma.org/campaign/news-junkie/
Meet the Convene Editors: https://www.pcma.org/contact/
· Michelle Russell, Editor in Chief
· Barbara Palmer, Deputy Editor
· Jennifer N. Dienst, Senior Editor
· Magdalina Atanassova, Digital Media Editor
Follow Convene:
Contact Information: For any questions, reach out to Magdalina Atanassova, matanassova(at)pcma(dot)org.
Sponsorships and Partnerships: Reach 36,000 qualified meeting organizers with Convene, the multi-award-winning magazine for the business events industry. Contact our sales team: https://www.pcma.org/advertise-sponsorship/
Music: Inspirational Cinematic Piano with Orchestra
Creators and Guests
What is PCMA Convene Podcast?
Since 1986, Convene has been delivering award-winning content that helps event professionals plan and execute innovative and successful events. Join the Convene editors as we dive into the latest topics of interest to — and some flying under the radar of — the business events community.
Convene Podcast Transcript
Convene Talk, ep. 58/Apr 11, 2025
*Note: the transcript is AI generated, excuse typos and inaccuracies
Magdalina Atanassova: This is the Convene Podcast. Welcome to another episode of the Convene Talk after a little break. Michelle, what are we talking about today?
Michelle Russell: Well, we're talking about what's on everybody's mind, which is the current administration's policies, cuts and other stuff that's happening that's having a direct impact on events here in the United States and how that's being felt in other countries.
So we've published a few stories already about this and we are planning on our June issue cover story being on this topic and using actual data. We're going to survey our audience on the impact they are feeling and what they're doing about it to give a sense of how our industry is being more proactive rather than reactive because we don't know what is going to happen in the next few months.
Everything feels very uncertain. So just to give you a sense of what we've already published,
our contributor Dave Lutz talked about how DOGE is impacting the meetings industry and it had to do with funding of institutions, of research institutions. So the Department of Government Efficiency is DOGE and there initiative.
Their executive order includes a section for non essential travel justification. The agency head shall prohibit agency employees from engaging in federally funded travel for conferences or other non essential purposes unless the travel approving official has submitted a brief written justification for the federally funded travel within such system.
So this is directly impacting organizations like I would say he talks about foundations, some of them are federally funded, as well as colleges and universities.
And one of the things that I thought was interesting is that he gave some early indicators of how these effects might be felt by associations that are working on their annual meetings now.
So he said you might see last minute cancellations from both registrants and speakers. These are people who may have been funded before to travel to events and they no longer are getting that funding from their institution.
A decline in abstract submissions, lower association member renewal from academia professionals and students,
and resignations from committees or task forces.
Those are four like early indicators that your event, your industry is being affected.
And then I just went into catalyst, which is PCMA's community engagement tool, and someone had asked is anybody else starting to see cancellations and registrations from attendees whose travel has been cut off?
And a number of people responded and said that they are hearing from longtime faculty that they are not submitting meeting content because they are adhering to the communications ban for federal employees or are no longer an employee.
And then on the attendee side, the whispers are getting louder by the day with many Members saying that their institutions have started travel freezes because their grants or federal funding has been cut.
Someone said, I have multiple groups that are holding off on signing their contracts. This is someone who manages events. One is medical research and works off of funding from the nih.
Others are government related associations and don't know what to expect. So there's still a lot of uncertainty as well as certainty because some people absolutely know that they are not gonna be able to travel.
Others are still trying to figure out if the dust is ever gonna settle.
So I'm interested in hearing what Barbara and Jen and Maggie think. Who wants to go first?
Barbara Palmer: I'll jump in just because the scenario you paint is one of uncertainty. And there's so many, in addition to the funding,
there's so many other factors that are uncertain right now. And yesterday there was a story that four countries in Europe and Canada changed their travel advice for the US Saying that you should really check your documentation, that you should carry it with you at all times.
And Finland specifically advises travelers to avoid large crowds and demonstrations in the US Particularly in major cities,
it says because of politically charged events could escalate unexpectedly.
And I just feel like large crowds in major US Cities equals events.
And I feel like just this uncertainty is going to affect the decisions that people are making right now about events that are already scheduled. But what about next year? What about, we all know that events don't operate in a short time frame.
There's lots of planning. And on LinkedIn, I'm reading a Latin American scientist, he's at a, a university in Brazil and he was educated at mit, was just saying, why would we go there?
It is not welcoming.
And it's just like, don't go there. And there's a lot of scientists talking about alternatives to the U.S.
so I just think even if they come back and say,
oh, we're going to restore this funding,
these grants are now that's released, there's this question of what is going to change in the next two months. Why would we do that? Why would we plan for something that's so uncertain?
So, Jen, I see your hand up.
Jennifer N. Dienst: Thanks, Barbara. Yeah, I just listening to this and thinking back on some stories and some conversations that I've heard, it's just so concerning when you think about planners who have events planned, you know, here in the US and they have a large contingency of international attendees.
So one story that comes to mind is from the Guardian that talked and we'll link this in the show notes for those of you who want to read it in full.
But it was about a French scientist who was denied entry to the US After Border Patrol went through his phone and found messages to colleagues that were critical of some of the current administration's policies and actions.
So something to think about is this is a French scientist, I'm assuming from the story that he has a French passport.
You know, we have a visa waiver program here, and France falls under it, and as do a large number of countries. And when you think about, you know, I think a lot of people who come to the US for conferences or for work, you know, come through that visa waiver program with the assumption that they're not going to hit any roadblocks,
they're just going to whiz through. And, you know, this, I think, shows that that's not the case. And this is pretty scary.
I've also heard anecdotally from some friends who live abroad in different countries that they're already just, like, not. And they're not even from countries with the visa waiver program with the US but they have in the past traveled frequently to the US with no issues.
Visa. Visa issues. And they're already saying, like, I'm not even gonna deal with this. I'm just gonna go to conferences in other countries. I'm just gonna skip all this because this seems like a total waste of time.
I don't want to deal with it.
Michelle Russell: I think you want to just underscore the point that that French scientist was coming to a conference, a science conference in Houston. So he was coming here for a conference and was denied entry.
Right. And so I think when people see that example as. That's a direct. Right. That's a direct connection to our industry.
Jennifer N. Dienst: Right? Yeah. That's really scary. And, I mean, I'm sure he had a ton of money tied up in, you know, this trip, and he was just turned right around. So, yeah, that's a scary thing.
Really curious to know what planners are, you know, who have a lot of attendees coming from other countries, what they're thinking about, because there's going to be a whole lot of hoops to jump through,
not just for citizens coming from countries where they need to get a visa, but citizens coming from countries where they have a visa waiver program. That's not a. It's not a given anymore.
Barbara Palmer: I think when you think about,
you know, we have brand us.
Like, what is our brand? Our brand, I think, has been freedom of expression and freedom of exploration of ideas.
And one of the other themes, I see a lot just looking At Reddit and also LinkedIn where a lot of people express themselves is just the censorship angle.
Someone said that they were collaborating with US scientists and mid paper they asked them to take out things that had to do with dei.
They're removing climate justice terms. The term social justice is on this list of words that don't pass through.
It's just like a 180 degree turn. I think from where you think that you are in the US that there's a lot of protection for speech and if you're not a citizen there's this expectation of due process.
And there are stories about tourists that are being detained for a long time because of, you know,
just because of entry irregularities or something that happened as they tried to enter the US and it's, I feel like there's, it's like this idea of friction, like how much are you going to endure if it was this one point of friction if you thought you're going to get there and there's just too many points along the way,
I think that really make it difficult for people to come here. One of the recommendations I did read is it said at the very least conferences and conventions that are expecting international visitors should have a 24 hour hotline where a person who's entering the country would know that they could call and that they would have,
you know, people would assist them.
Jennifer N. Dienst: Good idea.
Barbara Palmer: Yeah.
Magdalina Atanassova: Maggie,
when you mentioned friction,
I was thinking is it only friction or is it also fear at this point? And we had this discussion prior to recording even how much I can say about that.
And again, I'm not even being critical of anything,
but there is this fear to even express,
yes,
whatever opinion on the topic just because of all the examples that are being portrayed in the media. And I've also heard the doubts depending on which side politically people sit, that maybe this media outlet over exaggerated certain aspects.
Like you said, you expect people to express themselves freely, but also that the US is not associated as being a country that would put certain things in media that just reflect a certain point of view.
So at least that's not my perspective as a person from outside.
And now as a person that's not living in the country, I'm starting to be a bit more doubtful of what I read, where I read it.
You know, with all the AI things and the general political climate, things are unclear to say the least. Michelle.
Michelle Russell: And that is, unfortunately it's happening at the same time that we've written about the fact that face to face events or conferences are the places where people put their trust because there is so much online that they can't be sure is actually true.
And then in News Junkie, there was a story about a scientist in nature,
talked about what kinds of conferences should I go to. And association conferences came up. Like that's almost a sure bet because those are the events that are. There's a long history.
It's not just about making money. It's not just somebody putting something together quickly just to get people to register and pay for their spot. These are, these are organizations that have a long history and a mission and a goal of supporting their members.
So it's just a sad thing that our industry is in a great position to deal with all of this stuff that's happening. And yet coming here, if you're not in the United States, you're coming from another country, is becoming more difficult.
Barbara Palmer: Barbara I actually would just love to read what the scientists wrote about the self censorship here. He's talking about the American collaborators in his research and he wrote they asked me to cut all sensitive words about DEI and the environment in a co authored manuscript that was in mid review.
This is scary stuff and really hit home for me. It's one thing to see it on the news and another for American researchers to bow down in fear for losing funding even when it's already awarded.
This is not freedom, it's censorship.
I feel for my American collaborators, but I'm not about to sacrifice scientific integrity.
There's this other thing going on in the current administration, which is they're targeting universities that hold certain opinions and I think that is what sets it up for self censorship.
And it is just not a place where I think people are used to being when they think about coming to a meeting in the United States.
Michelle Russell: Dave Lutz ended his article with a Forbes article that said it best. It takes relatively little time to tear down the academic science enterprise, a system that's been key to the country's decades long leadership in science, medicine, technology and business innovation.
But it will take much longer to build that enterprise back, putting the nation at risk for economic decline, weakened security, impaired health and a poor quality of life.
There are so many ripple effects to what's happening that I think to your point, Barbara, it's not going to take just months to restore it. These things are being dismantled and there's a big question of how long it will last.
Barbara Palmer: Yeah, to take the lens out of bed, this is all hitting very hard in the US it's not going to stop the scientific enterprise. It's not going to stop researchers Getting together.
It's not going to stop people advancing knowledge. It's just going to move it.
And it'll be interesting to see if virtual events and hybrid events are coming on.
One of the things that I've been looking at is the Lindau, the Nobel Scientists gathering that's held every summer in Germany. And many of the presenters there are us, because a lot of Nobel laureates in science have been been US scientists because of the, of the US's investment in science.
And it's just going to be very interesting to see what the conversation is there,
because it's not going. I mean, that's the good news. It's not going to stop.
People are not going to stop wanting to enhance the sense of belonging in the world. You know, we talk about belonging and it's not,
it's true. Like, people need to see themselves and feel like they belong, and those movements are not going to stop in the world,
which I think is good news.
Jennifer N. Dienst: No, I agree with you, Barbara. They won't stop. And just like we did the pandemic, we'll find a way to pivot. Sorry for using that overused word that we all kind of despise now for virtual events, but I think what will happen is the US will stop being a place that people will want to come to,
not only for meetings and events, but for leisure travel. I mean, I'm already seeing a lot about, you know,
Canadians not planning or kind of canceling their trips to come to the us, but also I've seen comments on various stories and in various places about should the US hold the Olympics, should it hold the, the World Cup?
And I think those are fair questions to ask. It's really hard to see and hear that as an American, but, like, it's fair considering, you know,
what's going on. So that, that worries me. I, you know, I think a lot of our destinations will be negatively impacted if this keeps on the same course, which I don't want to see.
You know, course meeting planners who host a lot of events here in the us, not just abroad. Like, it's, it's definitely gonna have some sort of chilling effect, and which is crazy when you think about the economic impact that tourism as well as meeting events have on our country.
I mean, it's huge. It's enormous. And why you want to negatively impact that is beyond me.
Michelle Russell: There is a new survey that came out from Miles Partnership and Longwood's International, which is the American Travel Sentiment study.
And since September 2024, the percentage of travelers who say Politics will greatly impact their travel choices. Has jumped from 24% to 42%.
So you can see there's just been a huge change. And I think in Europe, it's geopolitical instability. It's not just related to what's happening here. It's also happening in Europe.
So just lots of uncertainty going forward.
Magdalina Atanassova: It feels like we are back in the pandemic without being back in the pandemic, which is very sad.
Michelle Russell: But the pandemic, I felt like we were unified. We all were sharing the same crisis.
Barbara Palmer: Yeah. We had the one common enemy, which was the virus.
Michelle Russell: Right.
Barbara Palmer: And we all, you know, not perfectly,
but, like, that was. The goal, was to protect people from the virus.
And here the goal is unclear because there are a lot of people that are very happy people within the United States that are happy with the changes.
Jennifer N. Dienst: I'd love to hear from them just to see what the heck they see positive coming out of this, because I can't find one. I. I try to play devil's advocate in my own brain all the time, but, like, there is no upside to any of this stuff.
Barbara Palmer: Well, you know, I think a lot of people felt like the federal government was bloated.
I think the thing that is the hardest for me to stomach is the cuts to usaid and also the. The abruptness of the cuts and the way they're being done.
They are being done with the chainsaw.
Jennifer N. Dienst: If you look at what these things actually make up on in the pie, it's actually relatively small.
And they use these big numbers and prayed out these numbers to kind of pretend like they're. They're saving all this money. But when you look at it, it's like, oh, actually, it's like a really small piece of the pie.
And like,
I feel like they could go in with. With a scalpel and take out from other places that would make more significant impact. I mean, I'm by no means an expert on this, but it's.
It's pretty obvious when you just do, like, a little bit of digging.
Barbara Palmer: Yeah, it.
Jennifer N. Dienst: I think they're just cutting things that politically serve them.
Michelle Russell: Yeah.
Barbara Palmer: I think that there's been this thought that, like, we'll just disrupt it.
You know, we're all very comfortable with the word disrupt in business.
Oh, that. You know. But when it comes to, like, you don't want to disrupt an Ebola program that is looking, you know, tracing cases, you don't want to disrupt,
you know.
Jennifer N. Dienst: Cancer trials, dismantle the Department of Education.
Barbara Palmer: Yeah. It's much harder work to Build. It's much harder work to build than to take apart.
And I feel like if we're getting, like, if to look at a positive thing, like everything in the industry in terms of business events, like, there's a lot for associations, scientific associations, a lot of that is building and they know how hard it is.
And there's just a lot of committees and a lot of, you know,
anguishing discussions on how to do things best.
And, and that's what it's going to take, I think, to get out of it is to not look for the quick fixes and to look for, like, what are, what are some role solutions.
Magdalina Atanassova: Yeah, there's a lot to look out for. And I'm curious, to be honest, to see who step up to fill what gap in geopolitically speaking, you know, geographically speaking, or whatever you want to call it, you know, which countries will be now more favored because of this disruption.
I guess we'll see.
Michelle Russell: I think what we're going to do, though, is continue to have these surveys, I think just to get a sense of how it's having an impact, because we can't, as you said, we can't.
We'll see, but we'll also. We also need to understand how it's affecting our industry and we need research for that. We need to learn.
Barbara Palmer: Yeah. And we're particularly concerned about scientific and medical associations because that is something that is so. Conferences are so vital to that.
But there are other industries. I think we'll see if there are industries that are not affected by this, if there are events that aren't affected by this. Like, the future is unknown at this point.
Magdalina Atanassova: Well, thank you all for the discussion.
Remember to subscribe to the Convene Podcast on your favorite listening platform to stay updated with our latest episodes. For further industry insights from the Convene team, head over to PCMA.org/convene. My name is Maggie. Stay inspired. Keep inspiring. And until next time.