Comments on: Sacred Cow #8: The Laser Pointer Is A Useful Tool

By: Ellen Finkelstein

Ellen Finkelstein — Fri, 18 Sep 2009 01:24:45 +0000

Like coreymol, I add animation to a slide when I'll want to call out a particular part. Usually, I just add a red circle around a number, or part of a chart.

By: How getting in the beam makes you a better presenter : Speaking about Presenting

How getting in the beam makes you a better presenter : Speaking about Presenting — Thu, 17 Sep 2009 01:47:05 +0000

[...] Some people recommend using a laser pointer. But just because remote mouse manufacturers put laser pointers into their remotes doesn’t mean you should use it. You have to make silly little circles around what you’re pointing to so that people can see it. This is wimpy compared to getting in there and showing people physically. Even when you have a big screen you can do this, as Hans Rosling shows. Mike Pulsifer has written an indepth post on the ineffectiveness of using a laser pointer. [...]

By: Best Public Speaking Tips and Techniques [2009-05-16]

Best Public Speaking Tips and Techniques [2009-05-16] — Sat, 16 May 2009 07:06:42 +0000

[...] Pulsifer argues that laser pointers harm your presentation. It seems, at least in my stomping grounds, that it’s [...]

By: WVMikeP

WVMikeP — Sat, 16 May 2009 01:59:39 +0000

Very good points

By: corey

corey — Fri, 15 May 2009 21:26:48 +0000

Good stuff, and I mostly agree, in some situations I think that “visual” clues can aid in the presentation maybe not a laser pointer. When I create slides I know what I will need or want to place emphasis on so instead of using a pointer I build in actions to my slides for text I will change the color of the important words or sentence or maybe have an underline appear. for objects I have a shape appear around the area I want to point out. pretty effective if done correctly.

By: WVMikeP

WVMikeP — Thu, 14 May 2009 11:32:21 +0000

Hans Rosling's presentation is a great example of how to interact with your data. By doing it the way he did minimizes the focal points such that you can see what's happening with the data and it's not at all removed from the presenter and his presentation. All too often, instead of bringing the data and presentation together the way he did, people will just try to point to it in a detached manner with their little laser.

That's not to say, however, that there wasn't room for improvement. It would have been great if he could have shared that animation outside of his statistical program. There was a lot of visual distractions around the edges. Also, remove some of the extra “ink” and you'll have a chart that's easier to read. Edward Tufte's “The Visual Display of Quantitative Information,” though a very academic, and for some, difficult read, is in my opinion a must read for anyone working with charts. Heck, some times, even tables are more appropriate than charts. This isn't the case with Hans Rosling's data, but we had one such example at work where a colleague was trying to force data into a bar chart. It was an incomprehensible mess. It's not a statement about her, but rather that the chart could not possibly be made to do what she wanted it to do. A redesigned data table emphasizing information density (as opposed to data density) brought forward the message she was trying to get across much more effectively.

By: WVMikeP

WVMikeP — Thu, 14 May 2009 11:16:41 +0000

When I said it was a “terribly inefficient form of communication, I'm referring to the amount of effort required by the brain, compared to other means, to absorb and process the information. The brain isn't wired to specifically process the written word. It's a task we force upon it because humanity has developed a good means of preserving what we say beyond the moment in which it is spoken.

When you read, you're actually recognizing the shapes of the collection of letters. This is one of the reasons, among others such as the thickness and x-height, etc., why some typefaces are more readable than others. Your brain takes those shapes and moves that information from the visual to the verbal areas of the brain. This is where the inefficiency comes it.

True, for blogs and other similar mediums, the written word is by far the best choice. However, when giving a presentation, mixing the written and spoken word together forces too much mental effort on the audience.

A good book that covers this is “Brain Rules” by John Medina. Olivia Mitchell also wrote this at http://www.speakingaboutpresenting.com/visual-t...

Lastly, I will agree that many presentations would be better replaced altogether by a well-written document. Many times, we're dragged into meetings to endure an unnecessary presentation.

By: Olivia Mitchell

Olivia Mitchell — Wed, 13 May 2009 20:39:26 +0000

Hi Mike
I agree with you that the laserpointer is a wimpy tool which most of the time adds nothing to a presentation.

But I don't agree that your slides have to be so simple that the audience never needs any guidance from you as to where to look. I think it works great to physically go over to your slide and point to where you want your audience to look. For a fantastic example of this see Hans Rosling on TED.

Olivia

By: Stephen Hampshire

Stephen Hampshire — Tue, 12 May 2009 18:29:34 +0000

I agree with the point you're making, but “The written word is a terribly inefficient form of communication.” is just not true. It's very efficient, done well (after all, that's why blogs like this one exist, no?). The problem is that it doesn't mix well with someone talking.

Many presentations would be better being replaced altogether by a well-written document.