PowerPoint is a total tool (boom boom)

In today’s G2 section of The Guardian Julie Bindel tells us about Switzerland’s ‘Anti-PowerPoint Party’ and proudly tells us how when she goes to speak at conferences she carries only “a set of index cards”. How quaint.

People who know me are hopefully aware of my similar distaste for PowerPoint. In particular I despair of exactly those “fiddly slides consisting of flying text, fussy fonts or photo montages” that Bindel rages against. However to simply refuse to use the technology and rely instead on other tools with which you are eminently comfortable (Julie, if you are so against technology supporting your speech, try memorising it) seems at best amusingly old-fashioned and at worst downright lazy and insulting.

Yes, presentation software from PowerPoint to Keynote to Prezi can result in appalling visual assaults that can have the audience close to slitting their wrists. It’s not the software’s fault though. The software is just a tool; same as the person giving the presentation. Boom boom.

But a well designed presentation (PowerPoint is a product name, not a generic term incidentally) can be an enormously powerful supporting tool. Rather than simply dismissing it out of hand perhaps people like Julie Bindel and Matthias Poehm (founder of the Anti-PowerPoint Party) should invest some time in learning how to design and deliver good presentations rather than rejecting the underlying technology out of hand. I’d suggest hooking up with Garr Reynolds’ well established ‘Presentation Zen’ blog and books as a great starting point.

According to Bindel’s article, only 300 people have so far signed up to the Swiss party’s cause, which rather fills one with hope that the country is populated by people who understand the delineation between good design and poor use of technology. Perhaps Poehm should have formed an Anti-Comic Sans Party instead. I’m sure he would have achieved the required 10,000 signatures in the blink of an eye...

Comments

[joe]

I don't think the aesthetic merit or demerit of these things is relevant.

The relevant fact is simply that for some of us, technology can be difficult to use.

[alistair]

I've got no problem with not using a technology because one finds it difficult to use. But to use PowerPoint as an example, if someone can use it well enough to make a crap looking presentation then I don't believe it's their lack of skill with using the technology that is the problem. Rather, too many people seem to convince themselves that it doesn't really matter 'what it looks like'. It does, and if you can't make it look good, either collaborate with someone who can or do without.