"I had a meeting with Rob on Zoom yesterday" or I could write "I had a meeting with Rob yesterday"

Instead of the above two can I shorten it further and just say "I met with Rob yesterday." <-- Is this sentence correct and can be used instead of the above longer sentences?

So here can "met" be used for a Zoom meeting or is it only used when the meeting is in-person?

  • 3
    "Met" can be used in the context of a Zoom meeting, but it's worth clarifying in some situations that you met "online" or "virtually" so that there's no confusion. (Otherwise it may well be assumed you met physically.)
    – ralph.m
    Jun 2, 2023 at 13:17
  • @ralph.m But what if I say I had a meeting with Rob Could it also be assumed that one met physically in this case?
    – nicku
    Jun 2, 2023 at 13:51
  • Since COVID and the rise of online meetings, I don't think we can assume that "met" means "in person" anymore.
    – stangdon
    Jun 2, 2023 at 14:22
  • 1
    Unless there is other context, met means see in person or meet for the first in person. COVID or not.
    – Lambie
    Jun 2, 2023 at 14:25
  • 1
    I wouldn't use met for a voice-only conference call situation, but if you get to see the other person in a video call (conference, or just the two of you) I think it's fine. Jun 2, 2023 at 18:29

2 Answers 2


Yes, "I met with Rob yesterday" would likely be correct for the situation. It does leave some ambiguity because some listeners might assume you meant you had met in person - they would need context to know one way or the other. The important thing to recognize here is that the reason we can call a zoom meeting a meeting is that we assume the important/relevant aspects overlap. In business settings, when we say 'meeting' we generally mean an official or semi-official conference/conversation, so if what you want your audience to understand is that you talked with rob (in context, talked with rob about specific issues), then saying 'I met with Rob' is correct, whether you talked in person, over zoom, or even on the phone. In a casual or friendly environment, 'met' has more of a connotation of physical interaction ('I met Rob at the park'), so if that's your context it would probably be better to say something like "I called Rob" or "I had a video call with Rob" to convey the correct idea.

  • 1
    You hint at this, but worth noting explicitly that "met with Rob" is fine online, but "met Rob" probably implies in person. "Met" can mean "have a meeting" or "run into"; which is more likely will depend on whether you're in a situation where you have (business) meetings.
    – Stuart F
    Jun 2, 2023 at 18:49

I don't think English has anything special in comparison with other languages.

"Meet" without qualification generally means "face-to-face", but can be qualified to mean "over a video link". And in context may be understood to mean "over a video link". The context might be simply referring to a meeting with someone who is known not to be physically present.

So I suppose you could say that the invention of software like "zoom" has introduced a potential ambiguity in the word "meet" or "meeting". But does it matter? If you are saying "I had a meeting with Rob and we decided to bid for the Bloomsbury contract" - does it matter how the meeting was I'd say it doesn't. So this is just a minor ambiguity that has no real impact on communication.

If you say "I will have a meeting with Rob tomorrow", and unless I had some reason to think otherwise, I'd picture you meeting in person. If I said "Please give him this gift from me" (assuming it was in person) you could easily correct me. But most of the time it simply doesn't matter.

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .