Faces Don’t Equal Engagement

This is a facilitation hill I’m absolutely willing to die on: mandatory camera culture can be more harmful than helpful.

Podcasts captivate millions without a single face on screen. Conference calls used to be audio-only and no one burst into flames. So why have we become so obsessed with constant video visibility as proof of engagement?

Let’s be clear: “video on” can be:

• distracting

• emotionally draining

• triggering for folks with body image concerns

• and environmentally wasteful (yep, video uses over 90% more energy than audio)

Plus, I’ve noticed that participants often start performing for the camera rather than contributing meaningfully, especially in sessions that are being recorded. It becomes about looking engaged, not being engaged.

On International Day of People with Disability (and every day, honestly), it’s worth remembering: not everyone processes information the same way. Turning off your camera to think clearly is no different to turning down the radio while parallel parking.

I’ve had this debate more times than I can count. The usual concerns are raised: rudeness, engagement, accountability, distraction. All valid thoughts. I just don’t think they hold up to scrutiny. A notable exception: attendees who are hard of hearing.

So, here’s your permission slip: it’s okay to let people choose what works best for them. And as ever, having a culture where people can ask for what they need (whether it’s camera off to process, or camera on to lip read) is the goal.