Untitled

Gordon Golabowski

Comm 375 self-reflection

                Comm 375 has taught me a lot of valuable insights into presenting.  All the other presentation classes I have been in all focus on aspects like eye contact, tone, rate, ect. All those aspects of presenting are obvious and are not really needed to be taught. I only improved in my other presentation classes because of practice not really because of learned concepts. In this class the focus was never really on those obvious concepts that do not really need to be reviewed again. I felt even if I did not do any presentations I would have walked away from this class being better at presentations. One concept that I really took home from the class was simplicity. I feel that was an over-arching theme of the class, thanks to our text book. I learned how visual aids, may not be aids at all and can distract the audience. Making visual aids simple and complementary really brings life to the speech. When visual aids become primary they really take a lot away from a presentation. This can either be because the “visual aids” are distracting or over stimulating which breaks the concept of being an aid. Simplicity is a concept I never thought about being a part of presentations but  after comm. 375 it might be, in my opinion, one of the most important parts of the presentation. I feel a good way to summarize to importance of simplicity in presentations can be described in this Leonardo da Vinci quote, “simplicity is the ultimate sophistication.”  With that in mind I can really improve my presentation skills.

The other really important aspect of presenting that I did not learn till the last lecture was stress. I feel my earlier presentations were good because of the stress I felt that pushed me to produce good work. However, when the last lecture came around I felt a great sense of apathy for the speech.  This absence of stress and caring really hampered my speech. I could not point out the weak points in the speech to you; I could just feel it was of sub quality. Even though I worked a fair amount on it, I feel the lack of emotion towards it really showed and hopefully in the future I will find a good way to pump myself up for a presentation every time.

I do not know what kind of a presenter I am, or will become. I just try and let the speech write itself out and I am just along for the ride.  What I really need to improve upon to really help my presentations is asking other people for their opinion.  In the beginning of the course grouping off with people really sparked a lot of ideas and I think drastically improved my presentation. That was another reason why my last lecture was so poor I did not use the help of other people. In the future I just hope to keep things simple, get pumped, and don’t be afraid to ask for a little help writing a speech out.


The most obvious reasons why this presentation crumbled were because the presenters where offering a product that could be easily copied and could not show why their site was unique and only they could do it.  First off for me to accept their deal, they would have to show that their site could be hard to copy. Also showing why I would not want to copy their site and just team up with them.  Also they would need to convince me why people would go to their computer first when they are hungry. Last but not least, they seemed confident when presenting but during the question and answer section their confidence slipped away. Why should I be confident in their product if that people who made it are not?

                If I had a second chance to present I would try and fit more information in the presentation to leave out questions the dragons might have asked. Tell why out site is unique to all the other food ordering sites, just because it is similar does not mean theirs is better.  I would also, tell the dragons that if they helped us with our site little effort would need to be done to get the service out there.  We already have a group of people that trust us will little advertisement the success would come quite easily with a little more advertisement.

I feel that the effectiveness of his story was a double edge-sword. To start out with the positive, the presenter gave a story that all people could relate with him to. Everybody knows him as the “dirty jobs guys.” Giving a story about dirty jobs really helped connected him with his audience.  The story itself was really entertaining as well, not knowing the topic of the presentation did not matter. I wanted to keep watching just to hear the end of the story, by the time the story ended I was so entertained I was ready to listen to whenever he was relating the story to. On the downside of thing, the presenter chose just a good and entertaining story, I feel that it took away from the overall message of his presentation. the second half of the presentation after the story fell short. I feel that if he had chosen a story that was a little less powerful that the second half of his presentation would have been better well-rounded.  Even after watching his presentation, I am not quite sure what his main topic was, he covered a lot of points that over lapped, but was it to not follow your dreams, look for innovation elsewhere, that these “dirty-jobs” are more important than we think, I just don’t know.

<!— /* Font Definitions */ @font-face {font-family:”Cambria Math”; panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4; mso-font-charset:1; mso-generic-font-family:roman; mso-font-format:other; mso-font-pitch:variable; mso-font-signature:0 0 0 0 0 0;} @font-face {font-family:Calibri; panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4; mso-font-charset:0; mso-generic-font-family:swiss; mso-font-pitch:variable; mso-font-signature:-1610611985 1073750139 0 0 159 0;} /* Style Definitions */ p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal {mso-style-unhide:no; mso-style-qformat:yes; mso-style-parent:”“; margin-top:0in; margin-right:0in; margin-bottom:10.0pt; margin-left:0in; line-height:115%; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:11.0pt; font-family:”Calibri”,”sans-serif”; mso-ascii-font-family:Calibri; mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-fareast-font-family:Calibri; mso-fareast-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-hansi-font-family:Calibri; mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-bidi-font-family:”Times New Roman”; mso-bidi-theme-font:minor-bidi;} .MsoChpDefault {mso-style-type:export-only; mso-default-props:yes; mso-ascii-font-family:Calibri; mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-fareast-font-family:Calibri; mso-fareast-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-hansi-font-family:Calibri; mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-bidi-font-family:”Times New Roman”; mso-bidi-theme-font:minor-bidi;} .MsoPapDefault {mso-style-type:export-only; margin-bottom:10.0pt; line-height:115%;} @page Section1 {size:8.5in 11.0in; margin:1.0in 1.0in 1.0in 1.0in; mso-header-margin:.5in; mso-footer-margin:.5in; mso-paper-source:0;} div.Section1 {page:Section1;} —>

The effectiveness of Pecha-Kucha seems to come from how conversational it is. The presenter told a couple stories, and through those stories was able to figure out how to go on an adventure with without spending a great deal of time and or money. As the presenter told all of his adventure stories the pictures that were presented helped guide our attention through the story I feel that it really drawn me into the presentation.  The limitation of the slide really helps stopped me from wondering off mentally or focusing on unrelated parts of a slide and lets me only focus on a picture for so long. Yet, I feel that having to go along with the slides almost negates the speakers ability to improvise and would not be able to  change bits of his presentation to better accommodate his audience if possible. I think a big challenge is trying to integrate so many slides in such a short time. Not that Pecha-Kucha has an excessive amount to slides I am not used to spending only 40 seconds on a slide, I am used to using only 4 or less for an entire presentation.  I think a way to counter-ac t this problem is try to find maybe pictures from the same series of photos taken so I can have several different slide that all cover the same part of spoken part of the presentation.

I first thing that I noticed that would bring criticism to the presentation was how the presenter was constantly looking on the slide and reading directly off the slide as well. I think that both Tufte but especially Reynolds would be nauseous by this.  Tufte would be appalled at how many words where on so many slides. Some slides where nothing but one big paragraph. Reynolds would really hate not just how many words were on each slide but by how little space is left on each slide. Reynolds could have written the book, the joy of empty space in PowerPoint presentations, by how much he crams that concept down our throats, yet very few slides have a lot of empty space. However, I think all these broken rules really complement this presentation. He acts like he is an audience member by the way he looks at the slides, and says, “This doesn’t make sense.” He then goes to explain it in such a way, that it makes more sense the way he laid the slides out. When he gets up and actually touches the screen it really gives the audience a dead giveaway what part of the slide is really important.  This was definitely a presentation.  He was up and going walking around and pointing. His body was as much as a part of the message as what he was saying was.

hedberg comments

This one minute clip of Mitch Hedberg standup is the best video on the internet. First and foremost, the reason why I believe this is because presenting is not about someone having a check list on what a presentation should be and was able to check all the sections off. It is because he left the audience with a distinguishable and memorable presentation that sticks in your mind after you see it. Aside from that, he was able to get the reaction he wanted out of his audience.

Mitch Hedberd was able to give a memorable presentation because of this unconventional delivery of stand-up.  Normally the comedian is lively and very energetic.  On the other hand Mitch Hedberg has a really stiff and rigid stance when he talks to his audience.  He uses a monotone voice to deliver his jokes. He also makes terrible eye contact, wearing sunglasses (indoors), having hair cover his face, and actually not even attempting to look at the audience at times.  Many would think that this is a terrible delivery strategy. If he were using this strategy in a business meeting I would agree. Yet, he is trying to make people laugh. I have heard that one reason why people laugh is because they feel uncomfortable or something is not making sense. I feel that he is aware if this perception of humor. When the audience comes in and expects that standard comedian to go up there interact with them a lot and fit the common standup routine.  Then, they see a man who is not even looking at them probably leaving the audience with a sense of confusion and perhaps uncomfortable for awhile till they get the gist of his act.

Aside from his delivery technique, I also feel that the structure of his jokes also makes him a great presenter. The way he tells jokes is very unique just like his delivery. His jokes are very short, the audience can get a good representation of him if only seeing him for a short time. He keeps on telling short jokes at a leisurely pace and still gets a handful of them in, in a minute. This style does not allow bad jokes to take up much time and lessening their impact on him. He sometimes does not even rely on a cleaver punch line, or even having a punch line at all. His humor is derived on how he presents his material not what the material is. That is why I think it is the best presentation on the internet.

This one minute clip of Mitch Hedberg standup is the best video on the internet. First and foremost, the reason why I believe this is because presenting is not about someone having a check list on what a presentation should be and was able to check all the sections off. It is because he left the audience with a distinguishable and memorable presentation that sticks in your mind after you see it. Aside from that, he was able to get the reaction he wanted out of his audience.

Mitch Hedberd was able to give a memorable presentation because of this unconventional delivery of stand-up.  Normally the comedian is lively and very energetic.  On the other hand Mitch Hedberg has a really stiff and rigid stance when he talks to his audience.  He uses a monotone voice to deliver his jokes. He also makes terrible eye contact, wearing sunglasses (indoors), having hair cover his face, and actually not even attempting to look at the audience at times.  Many would think that this is a terrible delivery strategy. If he were using this strategy in a business meeting I would agree. Yet, he is trying to make people laugh. I have heard that one reason why people laugh is because they feel uncomfortable or something is not making sense. I feel that he is aware if this perception of humor. When the audience comes in and expects that standard comedian to go up there interact with them a lot and fit the common standup routine.  Then, they see a man who is not even looking at them probably leaving the audience with a sense of confusion and perhaps uncomfortable for awhile till they get the gist of his act.

Aside from his delivery technique, I also feel that the structure of his jokes also makes him a great presenter. The way he tells jokes is very unique just like his delivery. His jokes are very short, the audience can get a good representation of him if only seeing him for a short time. He keeps on telling short jokes at a leisurely pace and still gets a handful of them in, in a minute. This style does not allow bad jokes to take up much time and lessening their impact on him. He sometimes does not even rely on a cleaver punch line, or even having a punch line at all. His humor is derived on how he presents his material not what the material is. That is why I think it is the best presentation on the internet.