Am I the only person who grumbles when presenters (or writers) make interesting claims but provide no source/evidence?
In Conversation is the New Attention, Christopher Fahey (@ChrisFahey) and Timothy Meany (@TimothyMeany) argue that “public speaking technology” can and should be improved because conferences are broken. What do they mean by “public speaking technology”?
(a) gathering people in a room, (b) giving the speaker(s) a microphone and a projector, and (c) allowing the audience to ask questions at the end.
This is what I call “sage on a stage” and it is an age-old conference format with a technological supplement, the projector. And criticism of that format, at least for “learning”, is a century-old :