Attention spans have been dropping as of late, some studies contend by as much as
33% since the year 2000.

Also, most folks don't have as much experience with live entertainment as they did
just a couple of decades age, or even one decade ago.

This can have a number of effects on a working entertainer, such as a larger number
of folks, especially younger folks, having no idea the proper etiquette for
a live audience.

So what is to be done? I believe that these two issues, etiquette and attention,
can still be managed in the modern day, you just have to understand how.

I'll start with holding attention, or more importantly, interest.

A properly structured show is of high importance, now as much as ever, I have written
on show structure in the past, and will link to it when I find it, but to summarize,
your show needs to flow well, and have engaging plots, not unlike other forms
of entertainment.

This has been true as long as there has been live shows, but, audiences are now
conditioned by certain apps to have all info given to them in short increments,
all under the individual's control.

This doesn't mean the individual can't follow long plots, just look at how much
time is spent "binge" watching Netflix or a similar service, folks can
follow long complicated plots.

But the difference between Netflix and you are they have options, in that they
can pause it, they can play on their phone while they watch it, they can
stop watching halfway through if they decide they don't want to finish
all ten seasons of Smallville.

You don't want to be Netflix.

In my view, you must give something new to stimulate their mind regularly,
gone are the days of 8-minute ring routines, it may be the most artful
ring routine ever devised, but it is still the same stimulation
over and over.

You need some new stimulation in every routine, like how a comedian measures
jokes per minute, you can measure stimys, how many times you stimulate
your crowd in a minute or a routine, the more the better with a low
attention span crowd.

I started with attention first because it crosses over with etiquette quite
a bit, for example, although some might play on their phone in front of
you because they just can't stop themselves, more often it is because you
didn't engage them enough.

Here is a specific trick, it's quite old but very adaptable, when a person
would look at their watch, an entertainer would address them directly,
"You have the time sir?" this got this person's attention, but more importantly
it sent a message to the whole audience that you can see every individual,
and if they get distracted, you may call attention to them.

As a rule, most folks don't want to stand out in that way, this is very easy
to adapt to phone use, and it is quite effective at getting folks to keep
their phone in their pocket, not as effective as Copperfield though, he'll
take your phone away from you.

But what about other disruptions? such as folks mistaken what is happening in
front of them to be a personal conversation?

Well, one thing, is to set sort of rules at the beginning of your show, not
unlike what you might do for children, obviously you don't talk down on anyone,
but asking that folks refrain from passing in front of you blocking others
view, and to avoid using their phone will be taken as reasonable by everyone
but the most clueless.

This brings up hecklers, there needs to be a distinction here, the intentional
heckler, folks who no they're being a jerk, and the simply clueless.

There is hefty work on countering the jerk sort, my "go to" is to ignore them,
until you can't, then massage their ego to get them on your side.

For the clueless, I recommend acknowledging their statement and responding in kind,
this can often lead to something very entertaining, when it goes to far, simply
ask them very directly what you want them to do, you already have them on your side
so it is comparatively simple.

This is some of my thoughts and tips on the matter, what are some of your own
audience management tips for the modern era, and do you agree or disagree with
me on audiences having decreasing attention spans and etiquette,
I would like to hear it.

Methinks, you are "right on" yet incomplete in appraisal.

The problem goes beyond decreased attention into expectations for entertainment, magic, social interactions and personal relevance (as a few issues)
The old maxim "know your audience" is impossible, especially with small, mixed audiences in a 'hopping" setting.
Even folks buying tickets have no basis of common understanding or expectation.

For this reason, all of my effect descriptions in recent years suggest using Prelude or Overture framing to discover key elements of audience engagement,
with subsequent shifts to effects, storyline, type of effect or even away from magic all together.

Drop me line to ken@eversway.com and I'll send a copy of "OPS Magic" for your consideration.

In addition, it seems that way in which younger age cohorts process "interruption" vs. "distraction from older observers may be significant.
Likewise the apparent shift from "must be magic" to "fool me" or "have to figure it out."

Thus, all techniques for audience management must be grounded in understanding what their expectations are.
Since they may not know themselves, the "act out" like a kind of "selfie" complex. Good luck on figuring it out.

I disagree that it is the task of the performer to "give something new to stimulate," but I am not out there trying to make a living from "entertaining" folks.
There is always balloon-tying as an alternative.

As I recall, the Magic Café admin advises members not to write long posts.

Since the primary aim of a magician's art is to entertain the public, the importance of
the following rule is self-evident:

(3) Avoid complexity of Procedure, and never tax either the Patience or the memory
of an audience.

The thing presented should appear to consist in a perfectly regular and natural series
of operations; and, when the final effect is produced, it should be capable of instant
appreciation.

-N.M. 1911

Thanks for the contribution Tommy, I couldn't find any rule on the length
of posts though.

I emailed you ken.

I don't believe any person should be scared into doing something else because
of audience management challenges, it is doable even for a very easily distracted
crowd, most folks are attentive by nature, some, perhaps an increasing number,
are less so.

But this is far from a dire issue, an attentive performer will quickly learn
to manage a variety of crowds if they put in the effort.

You claim studies and percentages but provide nothing to show them.

I have seen you make this claim about distracted a few times now and wonder what your experience is from 10 years ago? What level are you working on now and what types of shows are you doing exactly?

I just don’t understand how this is such an issue. Here is a big reason why. It is not our job to tell an audience how to enjoy a presentation. Many people, most younger, experience life through the camera on their phone. It isn’t my job to correct that behavior. Our job is to provide the opportunity to have fun and not tell them how this must happen for them.

Many audiences sit on their hands and are not rambunctious but are coming up after the show saying it was the most fun they ever had. Just because they don’t act the way you seem to want to believe they should in no way indicates anything. Get over it. Let people enjoy how they do as long as it doesn’t interrupt others enjoyment.

This is something you learn after a few years. It is what makes me think you have not been doing this too long. It is ok to let people be themselves.

What about those with a babysitter for the first time? Or whose kid is sick? You don’t think they are allowed to look at their watch instead of whatever nonsense is being done that apparently can’t keep attention? How stupid would you feel for calling the people out for this? Do it just once at a corporate event and see what that does to your rebook rate. See if that agent is happy with that feedback.

As for your “laughs per minute” urban legend let me help you. Yes that phrase is bandied about as if it was actually used as some standard. It wasn’t. Please understand that the ONLY standard was how much money they make on food and drinks from the crowd you attracted that club owners cares about. Period. You could be a guy with non stop laughs literally and a guy who was just mildly amusing would be used every time if he attracted a drinking crowd. I know because I was there headlining for 10 years. They were running a bar business. That business was not tickets, it was drinks. Heck most of the room was paper back in the day.

You also might want to consider seriously that this seems to be a your problem. I have watched guys do 20 minute bubble acts. I have seen 45 minutes yo-yo acts. For you to say that the 8 minute ring routines are gone is ridiculous. A boring Ring routine was never in fashion. Just because YOU can’t do these things only speaks to your own personal experience and is far from a universal truth. Just be entertaining.

I do freely admit that it is an easier solution than figuring out how to entertain people.

Rule 3) Avoid complexity of Procedure, and never tax either the Patience or the memory of an audience, is a well-known rule from the well-known old book Our Magic by Nevil Maskelyne published in 1911. It goes to show that audiences over a hundred years ago were the same as they are today with regard to attention etcetera and the old rule 3 still holds good today. My advice is do not reinvent the wheel.

Hey Danny, thanks for the post, very thought provoking.

I do have some sources I'll share when I have time later today, I'll respond to
the rest of your post as well.

But first, do you really believe that comedy clubs such as zanies didn't track laughs per minute
back in the day? Or are you just messing with me?

It may not matter in other venues, but the idea that comedy clubs didn't pay attention to
laughs per minute of new talent is quite the odd statement.

Well I headlined comedy clubs for 10 years in the late 80's and 90's. I am telling you 100% that you could have 100X more laughs per minute and if you sold 50% fewer drinks the guy you are funnier than will get the job 100% of the time. The fact that you believe that is an odd statement speaks to how little you ever worked such an environment.

The job of the talent is to be able to keep people in one room buying drinks for almost 2 hours. They are in the business of telling jokes and engaging an audience. The club is in the business of selling drinks! The huge majority of clubs would paper the entire room of 300 or so people and put a 2 drink minimum on each free ticket. Then hopefully sell food and drinks over and above that minimum. If a comic with a HUGE laugh per minute rate sold only the 2 drink minimum and only 40 items of food and no extra drinks then that is the amount of money the club makes minus the talent. So 600 drinks plus 40 food items. If the moderately amusing guy sells 200 extra drinks plus sells 175 food items then that is the amount of money the club makes minus the talent. What is so odd about knowing the difference between those numbers? He is selling 200 extra drinks plus 135 extra food items. EVERY SHOW this happens!! The difference in money is astounding after 12 shows.

With this being the case, (And I ASSURE YOU IT WAS because I was there.) what makes you believe for a second that "laughs per minute" (Or as you incorrectly put it "jokes per minute") means a single thing to a club owner? Yes they are a comedy club so to be on brand they bring in funny people to make audiences laugh. Far easier to market things that way. But it is a BUSINESS in the end. You can't pay your mortgage or your suppliers with "laughs per minute". It is all paid with money made from drinks and food.

This is the problem with your entire post. It is just surface level "knowledge" at the most. It is things you have heard about and not experienced. This is the problem when you are speaking from things you think are right or seem right or you have read things from people who don't know in the first place either. It is how these myths get propagated. The part that makes me sad is I am not sure you will learn from this at all. I still believe that you will spout the same idea of "jokes per minute" as if it is gospel. I am thinking you will just keep going down this road of surface level knowledge somehow being a substitute for actual experience. I hope I am wrong.

Oh and you have switched from your incorrect assumption of "jokes per minute" to "laughs per minute of new talent". Neither is particularly useful anyhow. But that is your habit of moving off your original point.

You are correct Danny, I have essentially no experience in comedy clubs, and
my knowledge of them is mostly second hand.

I used the word "jokes" because I couldn't figure out how to spell "laughs".

Neither of these things was my point, my point was a comedian analyzes their act
for LPM, and a magician should do the same for moments of stimulation.

I do know some comedians, and they talk about LPM pretty often, your post made me
wonder if it was discussed on the Café, sure enough, it was: https://www.themagiccafe.com/forums/view......&start=0

The 11th post is yours Danny, to quote you: "Work for the Funny Bone, or Zanies or any number of large chains and they will indeed look for laughs per minute Which is a great gague for THEIR VENUE."

"It is absolutly useless to any other venue. Comedy clubs are just that COMEDY CLUBS. they expect and demand laughs. I know many magicians who do fantastic corporate work who can't compete in the clubs. Not bad performers, simply not suited to the venue."

You make 9 posts total in that thread, not a single one did you refer to laughs per minute
as an "urban legend" Or that laughs per minute doesn't matter to club owners because drinks.

Actually, you said the opposite, as did everyone else, at the end of your first post:
"This is why LMP matters. It defines you in the beginning. AFTER you are known and set apart and have a following you are not as dispensible to the clubs. LPM then can varry and you can spend some more set up time for jokes and gags."

Interesting that you would directly state that LPM matters in this thread, yet imply that
LMP doesn't mean a single thing here.

Normally, I would just assume you adjusted your opinions on the matter, but you
were in the process of leaving clubs at the time of that thread, so what exactly
made you adjust it?

I don't think you did, I believe you do believe that laughs per minute is
important to these clubs, and was used as a standard, you are just finding
ways to disagree with me.

Which is sort of odd because whether clubs cared about LPM wasn't the point anyhow.

None the less, thanks for the post, your math on clubs trying to sell
drinks was interesting.

That is the ticket in the door. Laughs. To be in brand you must be a funny person. They don’t hire keynote speakers or hack magicians.

Also one thing that changes your mind quickly is… wait for it… OWNING a club! Now perception changes because you are talking with other club owners as opposed to performers. See the difference?

The point I was making and stand by it an amusing corporate magician doesn’t necessarily translate to comedy clubs. Hack lines and bs don’t work so it is comedy that is the brand. I would not have corrected the term for you if it didn’t exist would I? The urban legend was just whimsical terminology.

Don’t take my words for it. Find a comedy club owner, if you can any more, and ask if it is more important to sell drinks or get laughs? It is simple money matters. Why would you dig up old posts to try to dispute this?

The fact that you can’t accept business 101 is shocking. Plus I said that is is COMEDY CLUBS so being funny was necessary. I said it mattered here though it was truncated that they bring in funny people to be on brand. No change at all really.

Plus drunk driving laws have destroyed many clubs and a shift has happened. Ask any bar owner about it. Many attitudes have shifted and hard. 1 extra drink each out of 300 people in a show can be the difference. 1 more food item matters. Unless you want to get into for some reason the economics of food and beverage and how it has shifted it is a pointless discussion.

And the idea of someone just finding ways to disagree with you is fairly narcissistic. Get over yourself.

So why not do us all a favor and list your performing experience? This way we know where the vast storehouse of knowledge comes from.

Thanks for clarifying, very interesting Danny, I don't know very much
about clubs, but I agree it isn't particularly relevant
to the topic.

I'm not in the habit of bringing up old stuff, but the contrast between what
was written by you and others in that thread and what you had implied here
was a sharp contrast, sorry if it was uncalled for.

Whoops missed the end of your message somehow.

Well Danny, I don't agree that it is a sign of my narcissism to believe
you have a tendency to seek out a way to disagree with folks, to
illustrate, I wrote: "You need some new stimulation in every routine,
like how a comedian measures jokes per minute,".

And you responded: "As for your “laughs per minute” urban legend let me help you.
Yes that phrase is bandied about as if it was actually used as some standard. It wasn’t."

I don't believe a person could get here without making a strong attempt to find
something to disagree with.

For one, it's false, it was used as a standard at some point as talked about by
you and several others in that old thread.

And two, it is irrelevant to my statement, I only stated that comedians count
LPM, I made no statement on if clubs cared, you got there somehow though.

As for talking more about my experience, I believe I have done that before, but I
notice it has come up in the business section as well, so I will just post on
that over there.

My storehouse is far less then vast.

You made a few other statements in that first post that warrants consideration,
but I am somewhat busy today, I will post about it tonight or in the morning.

Thanks again, your posts continue to be read and appreciated.

Why exactly would comics count them if clubs didn’t care?

Magic effects are not like jokes which people get: nobody gets a magic effect. However, magic effects are intrinsically humorous, with the humour being derived from the absurdity of nonsense appearing to make sense. They are two things: amazing and funny.

The counting in magic is done through the principle of Speed in Presentation. Roughly speaking, how many tricks a magician does an hour is determined by how much time he spends on the patter/entertainment that he dresses up his experiments with. To really understand this important principle, one needs to read the whole chapter on it in Our Magic.

https://mazemagic.moy.su/Maskelyne-Our_Magic.pdf

A couple of studies on attention spans, one interesting one from
the technical university of Denmark, here's an abbreviation of it from
their website: https://www.dtu.dk/english/news/all-news......7f0015f4

Another if from the International Journal of Trend in Research and Development,
titled: "Myth and Mystery of Shrinking Attention Span" which gives an interesting
overview, I would give a link but I don't link to pdfs.


For the watch trick, I can't say if it would get you black balled from the corporate
market as I don't work it, I will say that it would be effective.

When doing this, whether it be with a person looking at their watch or phone,
it shouldn't be combative; it should be like any other interaction with your
audience.

The easiest way to assure it is taken that way is to further engage with that person,
whether asking them to volunteer for something, or asking for input, the watch trick
only served as the start of the interaction rather than the whole thing,
this will be taken well by just about anyone.

This isn't a risky maneuver if the performer has any social awareness.

You mentioned that young folks look at life through their screen, and we should
let them, this leads to an important distinction, a person filming you isn't a
distracted spectator.

If a person was to stop this, they would have to specify no filming in their
performance agreement, inform everyone present, and anyone who doesn't listen
insist that they stop filming before you continue, this is the part where
Copperfield confiscates their phone or camara.

I don't do this, I specify on my website that anyone can film, and post it
on social media if they want.

This is for a couple of reasons, for one I don't care, and two, fighting folks
on this is more trouble than it's worth.

As for the ring routine, it certainly could be entertaining for 8 minutes,
Pop Haydn's routine comes to mind, but I was referring to the routines
from a century ago that is constant linking and unlinking, some folks still
do that, much to repetitive to hold attention even if it is otherwise good.

Bad example now that I think about it.

45 minutes watching a yoyo guy sounds dreadful though, unless it's
Steve Carell: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XnRxvqQhK-E

By the way the idea of measuring "Stimys" is not really as good as it seems in your head. Because a magic effect as tommy has pointed out is not like other forms of entertainment. Also what is "stimulated" in your mind? Do they just engage their mind or is it funny or dramatic or sad or memorable or does it evoke some other emotions in them? And within the entire show how do you believe this is in any real way quantifiable? Not a chance.

I get it you are trying to do some groundbreaking sort of thinking and such but you are way off the mark.

Is it possible that you are reaching for a different level in your career and THAT is the reason for the difference in audiences? You keep not telling us about your performance experience level and the reason I am asking is for this. When you try to jump up a level of audience and money and all that goes with it, often you will see differences in who you are performing for and how they act. They expect more. It is interesting that you seem to think this is just such a universal problem, and I have seen NO indication of it recently at all. As a matter of fact it was worse about 15 years ago when the technology was NEW! When TV became a 24 hour a day in HD and the explosion happened it was much worse. The tech was new and live entertainment actually saw a little dip. Now that the tech is old hat people are actually flowing back to live.

So my point is that you may very well be experiencing these problems. They may be serious problems. But they are not universal or even common. They are simply part of the process of moving up rungs on the career ladder. If you don't see it as this it will unfortunately hold you back from progressing. If you can't manage to engage an audience and keep them engaged that is really a you problem, not a universal problem with magic in general or entertainment as a whole.

It is interesting that you chose to ignore my points about why people may be distracted and why you would ever draw attention to such things? It shows a tremendous lack of experience. Because if I simply looked at my watch in a show and the jerk on stage drew attention to me like you suggested my response would be "no I was just trying to see how long I have to suffer through this nonsense". What is your response to that? Because I guarantee you 100% I would make you look like a fool if you did that to me in the audience. I paid for my ticket, not for you to heckle ME for just looking at my watch.

And why would you want to start your show with "rules" like you might for children? People have come to be entertained so just do that thing. Not the way I would start a show I intended to be entertaining.

And here we get to the problem. One why is there enough room in your script for a heckler in the first place? Again seems more like a you problem than a universal one. Two do you really think you can get a heckler on your side? No way. It simply hardly ever happens. And three why are they heckling you in the first place? In 35 years or so I have had about 4 hecklers and that was just drunks. Most of that time spent in comedy clubs and all inclusive resorts. This is a statistical anomaly.

The fact is magicians expect WAY too much from an audience. The audience has paid to see you so in my view it is you who owes them. YOU have a debt to pay off in entertaining them. If you concentrate on that, the rest seems to fall into place.

And you speak of a 45 minute yo-yo show as if you have seen one. You have not. So again you speak from authority as if you have any. Which is sort of a silly and bad habit to get into.

A lot there, thanks for the response.

I'll start with "stimys", nothing particularly groundbreaking, I believe
Dariel Fitzkee wrote about tracking moments of stimulation in one of his
books in the 40s, but I could be remembering wrong.

As for what counts, it's any time a person has a sudden spike in any emotion,
so, the moment the ball reappears under the cup, or the moment the rings link.

The fifth time the rings link or the ball jumps isn't because it is now expected
and they are intuited to it, the lines you deliver to build a plot or interest
isn't stimulation either, but a line that gets a laugh or boos is.

For the demographics of the folks most likely to have lower attention or lower etiquette,
I should have gone into it sooner.

The most likely age group is between 20 and 35, and don't go to live shows, I
have to go to them, the odds of a person getting distracted is higher in that
age range, as is having odd etiquette.

I haven't noticed an issue with folks above 40 really, and kids continue to be kids.

As for hecklers, I believe some folks use too broad a definition, the only person
i would consider a heckler is someone who is intentionally a jerk.

The demo of these is pretty much simple, mostly drunk folks as you mentioned, and
young males between 20-24 who are trying to show off, these are the ones
appeasing ego can be effective.

As for the watch question ""no I was just trying to see how long I have to suffer through this nonsense". What is your response to that?" This is the best thing that can happen in my view.

Never had a person take it as a "heckle", it is used as a first interaction to seg
into a volunteer, no one has taken it as at all negative, I do have several responses
if it comes up though and I look forward to that response if it ever comes up.

Probably not that exact wording as it usually comes up in the first couple minutes.

For the yoyo subject, I don't speak as an authority, I speak as a person who
has no idea what that is and immediately thinks of Steve Carell, seems like
something that would be hard to sell tickets too.

Between 20 and 35 don't go to shows? Oh lord your experience is vastly different from everyone I know. They are the key demo in many live performance environments. They have a lot of disposable income often prior to marriage and kids. I am not really saying your experience is wrong, just vastly different. And ANY time you are not the specific reason people are in the room you run the risk of distraction and need to get over it. I mean they owe you NOTHING because they are not expecting you in the first place. To try to demand attention from me in that situation would be embarrassing for the performer. I never treat folks badly, but if I don't want to be bothered that is also my right I believe.

The problem is this is the hamster wheel every magician gets on and can't get off. They think it is the only option out there and it is just so not true. There would be FAR more professional magicians if at the very beginning guys would figure this out.

So I should confess here. You are speaking as if this is universal truth. You tend to universalize your own experience. I DO NOT ever do shows where I am not the reason they are in the room. They know why they are there, they know how to act. They are paying kind of stupid money to do so. Sure you have some attention issues but generally far far fewer. The way you handle these is nothing like anything you have described at all. Unfortunately you have a very surface level idea of how to handle these things. It stems from your entire view of "me" first. You see it from your point of view and your responses all have to do with you and how your show is going. If you want to get past it you have to start seeing the entire process from the point of view of the person who is watching. It will change your entire outlook and approach.

In the end who cares if they look at their watch or don't pay rapt attention to your routines? How does that hurt you? So now you address it and look like sort of a jerk for doing so. Let it go, concentrate on the audience and not one person who offends you by oh my god NOT being 100% dedicated to your silly presentation. Better yet examine your presentation and figure out why someone would do such a thing in the first place. Yes it is tougher when they are not there to see you but it still can be done.

The first and hardest part is to put away the ego. Then, and only then learning can happen.

Some say, in theatrical magic, misdirection is a form of deception in which the performer draws the audience's attention to one thing to distract it from another. Managing audience attention is the aim of all theatre and the foremost requirement of all magic acts.

I wonder, if people are no longer paying attention, then how come we have any magic at all?

I got most of my card magic from old books and despite the fact that the world has changed my old tricks mysteriously still work.

What works, works! So they say.