PowerPoint Revisited
October 21st, 2005So, I took some flack (well, some good discussion ensued) for my comments yesterday on PowerPoint (PP).
The In Season Christian Librarian said:
“I must take issue with the article in Library Stuff about the much maligned Powerpoint. It isn’t the technology which is at fault but the presenter’s skills. After all, a part of Information Literacy is knowing how to properly communicate material. A poorly prepared presentation can’t be covered over by any technology. My touchstone for any presentation is a saying I heard too many years ago to count “Sure you love the writing, but will your reader turn the page?” How do you keep the audience, class, person on the other computer with you until you are through?”
The Redhaired Librarian (who I think will be at Internet Librarian) mentioned:
“Is Power Point a synonym for all presentation software, or is it Power Point itself?…I suspect Power Point is being blamed for the lack of sophistication in its users. I think it’s as good a product as any, and like any good product, it can be abused.”
Also, there were 4 comments that basically said the same as the above. Basically, it’s the person behind the PowerPoint, not the software itself, that is the cause of many presentation maladies.
I agree, in part. First, I’ve seen great presentations that use PowerPoint and great presentations that don’t use anything (Clifford Lynch at CIL 2005 is a good example of the latter). I’ve also seen amazing speakers that have terrible PowerPoint slides and should have just left their laptop at home. So, in part, it is the presenter, not PP. In part.
When I present, I show lots of examples. I’m all over the web. PP makes that very difficult. So, I blame PP for not allowing me (and the audience) to get the most out of my presentations. Blogs (and hopefully Wikis) work much better in the presentation environment in which I work. So, I blame PP for that.
Case in point. Today, I was at Vassar College presenting on Keeping Current with Blogs and RSS. I used a blog format and was able to interact with the audience more because I wasn’t moving from slide to slide in PP. I was able to move the presentation along quicker just by scrolling down one page and tabbing my way at a heavenly pace (I had two hours of presentation time and had to cover a lot of ground without losing my audience, which I didn’t). If I used a minimal amount of PP slides and links, I wouldn’t have been able to cover as much as I did. PP slows me down. I didn’t hear any clapping when I mentioned my non-PP presentation. Then again, I didn’t hear any objections. It was a non-issue.
I guess it’s a different strokes thing again, but I’ll continue to mention my gripes the future. I’ve used both types of presentation styles (I’m doing a wiki-based presentation in Monterey) and non-PP works much better for me and for the audience, which, after all, is what really counts, right?
So, I’ll rescind part of my “Let’s move beyond PowerPoint” statement. How about, give blogs a try and see which ones work best for you. Better?