Is multimedia evil?

Photo by Helico

Jeff Brenman from Apollo Ideas writes about a debate around the use of multimedia presentations in the courtroom. He quotes Texas lawyer David Bissinger that in Brenman’s opinion makes “a compelling case for multimedia in the courtroom” in this recent article from Law.com:

A compelling case exists that using multimedia increases juror competence. At least three reasons should prompt trial lawyers to use, and trial judges to embrace, multimedia devices. First, scientific and other high-level learning depends upon visualization; the best advocates, like the best teachers, teach by using visual aids. Second, multimedia argument advances the ancient art of advocacy through storytelling. Third, the forces of technological innovation will put lawyers who fail to embrace these methods out of business

And I ask: What is so compelling about three reasons?

As a former lawyer and someone who has been using presentations for teaching and lecturing for more than a decade now, I am absolutely shocked by the level of the argument that supporters need to stoop to in order to justify what is obvious .

My question is why do we even need an argument, not to say these arguments?

Multimedia (or put more simply, presentation slides) is just a tool. A tool that helps drive a person message across in a more accurate, simpler and persuasive way. But they are not the presentation. The presentation is made by the person. Be it a teacher or a lawyer. And the presenter doing the presentation has many tools at his disposal. For example, his voice or the way he moves his hands. Would you consider not letting a lawyer in court use his voice or his hands? Of course not.  But people are suggesting and asking for justification to use multimedia. Why?

I know what you are thinking to yourself: “but people built these awful PowerPoint presentations. The damage they do with these presentations is horrible. People can’t do that kind of damage with their voice or hands. Multimedia is used for evil. Let’s eradicate evil!”. Ok, maybe I took that a step to far… But Brenman mentions a similar line of argument: “There are some who think presentations force lawyers to dumb down their content for the jury”. All of that is true (well, expect the eradicate evil part). And you know what, unfortunately it doesn’t only happen in the courtroom.

But it is not enough. Two things should be mentioned here. One, is that I have seen some people who use their voice in a monotonous way or present the idea in a boring, non-compelling (and some would say misleading) ways without using PowerPoint. Do we say that because some people are incompetent we should prevent presenting?

Second, the fact that we have a tool that could be used both in a good and bad way does not mean we should ban it because it has bad uses. Some say Google Earth was used to plan and coordinate the bombings in Mumbai a few years ago. Would we ban Google Earth because it could be used for evil? Almost every human invention and tool has the capacity to be used in the wrong ways. And the immediate reaction is to try to stop it. But the key to progress can never be preventing the future from happening. New tools will always emerge. Instead of fearing them and saying that they change the ways things used to be, we need to learn how to embrace them and see how they change the game.

Multimedia, just like a person’s voice is only a tool. But it is one hell of a tool. There are things you can show with it that even the most talented presenter cannot do alone. Like Seth Godin writes in one of his latest blog posts:

A car is not merely a faster horse

And email is not a faster fax. And online project management is not a bigger whiteboard. And Facebook is not an electronic rolodex.

Play a new game, not the older game but faster.

Should we stop using cars because people make horrifying accidents and use them for robberies?

Let’s not blame the tools. Let put the people who use them accountable for their use of the tools.

Elad

Never start with the slides

Today I started building a new presentation. It is an idea that has been running in my head for a pretty long time. This one is different from other presentations I built till today, because I am not quite sure I will even give it. I am trying to see if I can create something of value. I have a few ideas who to give it to, but it is still vague. Currently I am just creating it for me, to help me think about the subject, hoping it will lead to something great.

I don’t know about you, but when I think of a presentation the first thing that pops into my mind is the slides. I can see many of the slides and what will be on them – the pictures, what I will say with the slide, how it will be revealed. This makes it very tempting for me to just start of by building the slides. This something I try not do. Granted, conveying ideas using pictures is sometimes very powerful. But you can jot down the idea of the slide without building the slide itself (perhaps on a back of a napkin, also see here). Instead, I write down the ideas for the slides and start writing the actual words I will use when i give the presentation. The actual speech itself. Only when I am sure about the main theme, the story, the idea I want to convey, I move to the slides. Sometimes, when I start building the slides I will go back and improve the words, but I always start with words first.

This process helps me remember something very important about using slides. The slides are not the presentation. I am. The idea is. The story is. The words I will say will be. The slides are just a tool. You can compare it to using humor. Humor is great tool for giving great presentations. When used in the correct way, it can turn a bad speech into a great one. But it is not a must. You give a wonderful and engaging presentation without using any humor at all. The same goes to slides usage. Slides can help you convey your idea visually. But first you need an idea. The slides can’t talk for you (and no, reading them out loud does not count). You don’t go writing your presentation around a joke. You don’t go writing your presentation around the slides.

Elad

Not to use PowerPoint and the taking of notes during a presentation

Seth Godin writes today an interesting piece about: “Nine steps to PowerPoint magic“. In it, he gives nine tips about how to use PowerPoint to deliver great presentations. I want to talk about 2 of these tips, one I agree with very much, and the second, I am not quite sure about.

The first and most important tip Godin gives is not to use PowerPoint at all. In his words:

Don’t use Powerpoint at all. Most of the time, it’s not necessary. It’s underkill. Powerpoint distracts you from what you really need to do… look people in the eye, tell a story, tell the truth. Do it in your own words, without artifice and with clarity. There are times Powerpoint is helpful, but choose them carefully.

Today, you can see many organizations that have fallen in love with the format of a PowerPoint presentation. There are some organizations in which it is expected (or worse – mandatory) to deliver information using Powerpoint. Many organizations created templates and rules about how to use this instrument which have nothing to do with giving a good presentation. PowerPoint usage has become a standard. Usually a bad one.

The problem with PowerPoint is that it is a tool that does not always fit the circumstances. Talking to an audience differs depending on the circumstances. Giving an inspirational speech about an idea and teaching something is not the same. Talking to 100 people is not the same as talking to 3 people. Not mentioning the differences in subject matter.

I remember when PowerPoint was starting to be used for giving classes in the one of the schools of the Israeli Air force where I was serving (yes, near the end of the last millennium). The commander of the unit was so impressed with intertwining new technology into the curriculum that he ordered every department in the unit to take at least three classes and build a PowerPoint presentation for them. I was talking to the officer in charge of guidance development and he told me this was an erroneous order, because PowerPoint should be used only if it can contribute to the class and improving it. It should not be a default setting.

I think it can be explained very easily if you think about a megaphone. Sometimes, a megaphone helps in making the crowd hear you and understand you. It is a great tool, if you are standing outside and talking to a large crowd. But if you are in a small room trying to talk to a small number of people, it would just seem ridiculous. The same is true with PowerPoint. Sometimes, it just makes you seem ridiculous.

If PowerPoint can contribute to your message or there is something visual you need to show your audience, use it, other wise you should think twice about using it. If you chose to use it, think carefully how to do it. PowerPoint can be used in different manners not only in the standard format we a used to seeing. For example, see here for using PowerPoint for presentations in small groups.

In the last weeks I have seen two great presentations that did not use PowerPoint at all. They did not need it. One is Malcolm Gladwell’s speech “Genius: 2012“. The second is Sir Ken Robinson’s speech “Do schools kill creativity?“

The second tip Godin talks about deals with note taking by the audience:

Too breathtaking to take notes. If people are liveblogging, twittering or writing down what you’re saying, I wonder if your presentation is everything it could be. After all, you could have saved everyone the trouble and just blogged it/note-taken it for them, right? We’ve been trained since youth to replace paying attention with taking notes. That’s a shame. Your actions should demand attention (hint: bullets demand note-taking. The minute you put bullets on the screen, you are announcing, “write this down, but don’t really pay attention now.”) People don’t take notes when they go to the opera.

Not that I have a problem with it, but I think Godin sets the bar a little high this time.

First, even if you are the best presenter in the world and have the most compelling message, there will still be some fluctuations in your presentation. And it is Ok that people write down things while during these fluctuations. Most people can write an idea down and continue to listen at the same time.

Second, Godin claims that a presentation should not be longer than 10 minutes. I am not sure that is always possible. But even in a 10 minutes presentation, the important idea is much shorter and usually repeats it self a number of times, because we all know the importance of repeation in presentations. The second time the same idea is presented – don’t you want your audience to write it down.

Third, I know that for me personally, when I feel like I have something to write down, it means the presentation is interesting and contributes to me. In the two aforementioned presentations I watched, I felt the urge to write some of the ideas down for later use during the speech.

Fourth, and more importantly, as Godin himself says – “We’ve been trained since youth to replace paying attention with taking notes. That’s a shame” – Maybe it is a shame. But that is the way people work – when you are presenting you should take that into notice. The all point of presenting is to create value for the listeners. I prefer they write own my main idea and remember it than having their full attention all the time and than having them forget my message afterwards because for some people the opposite of forgetting is writing.

 Elad