How effective are Sky Newswall presentations?



Regular readers will know that I've never been much impressed by the way in which BBC television news and current affairs programmes like Newsnight have become more and more dependent on PowerPoint-style presentations by their reporters (see below).

Unlike the BBC, Sky News doesn't have its reporters standing on one side of a screen but directly in front of their cinemascope-style 'newswall'.

Watching some of their reports on Libya, I began to think that it worked rather better than the BBC's reporter-standing-next-to-a-screen approach. But there are two reasons why I don't feel able to decide between them just yet.

The first is that I don't see it as often as BBC News and therefore need to watch more Sky News before being able to come to a definite conclusion.

The second is that the above clip uses a map, and maps can be a very helpful visual aid for audiences (see Lend Me Your Ears, pp. 152-3).

In fact, the above clip from Sky News reminded me of a brilliant lecture I attended about twenty years ago. The subject was the Soviet economy and the audience was made up of delegates on a general management course. The lecturer's only visual aid was a gigantic map of Europe and Asia that was pinned on the wall behind him. Rather than using a wobbly laser pointer, his pointer of choice was a billiards cue with which he punctuated his lecture by urgent dashes from side to side to point at the places he was talking about.

The Sky News presenter in the above clip doesn't dash from side to side - and was certainly a lot less worried that I was when a graphic of a jet fighter plane zoomed in and nearly hit him (1.05 minutes in).

But the question is: how effective are 'newswall' presentations when they're showing something other than a map?

I'm planning to watch Sky News more closely in the weeks ahead and will report back in due course. Meanwhile, I'd be interested to know what other viewers think about Sky's 'newswall' - and whether they think it's an improvement on the way BBC News replicates more conventional PowerPoint presentations.

Cameron's good timing

The UN resolution on Libya, in which the part played by David Cameron in pushing it through has been getting a good press (so far), happened at a rather convenient time for him. Party spring conferences, especially their Scottish spring conferences, tend not to get much media coverage.

But today the Conservative Party's spring conference in Perth did get quite a lot of media coverage, and provided the Prime Minister with a nice opportunity to say more about his stance on Libya.

And notice that, unlike the Deputy Prime Minister at the Liberal Democrat spring conference last week, Mr Cameron spoke from a lectern and looked considerably more statesmanlike than Nick Clegg did as he walked around the platform pretending not to be using a script while reading from teleprompters (HERE).


Results of the defend a doomed dictator speechwriting competition

In case you're wondering what this is all about, you can catch up on the details here:

Results
And the (first-past-the-post) winner is .... Julien Foster for speech D (see below). Second is ... Bryn Williams for speech F (see below).

What clinched it for Mr Foster was that his final line made all three judges (and me) laugh.

Judges Collins and Finkelstein concluded: 'We thought E and D were amusing, which we thought was the right way to approach the contest. They were both funny and just plausible enough. But, if we had to choose between them, D just gets the nod for the simple yet inexplicable reason that the David Steel gag at the end really made us laugh.'

Judge Grender noted "Enjoyed all of these and laughed out loud at the thought of Gaddafi saying 'Go back to your constituencies – and prepare for government'. But in the end it was F who demonstrated the rhetorical flair that all good pupils of Max Atkinson (or avid readers of Lend Me Your Ears) aspire to. The use of 'wind' contrasted with 'fire' was great. The liberal use of 3-part sentences had echoes of the rhetoric of Obama's best not Gaddafi's worst. 'Step back' so we can 'march forward' gave it a nice strong ending. Have not as yet noticed an ad on Working for You for a new speech writer for Libyan dictator, but if one comes up you should most definitely send in your c.v."

Thanks to everyone who took the trouble to enter the contest by submitting such high quality speeches and to Phil Collins, Danny Finkelstein and Olly Grender for passing judgement on them.

Olly Grender will obviously be receiving a previously unannounced Brown Nose Award for weaving an advertisement for one of my books into her comments.

First Prize: Speech D by Julien Foster
Friends, Libyans, Countrymen! Lend me your ears.
I come to bury Colonel Gadaffi, not to praise him.

I’m not going to read to you from a document.
But speak to you from the heart.

I’m not going to address you in classical Arabic.
But talk to you in Libyan.

Above all, I’m not going to hide from you.
I’m going to say it as it is.
And it may be a bit messy. But it’ll be me.

We now have a huge opportunity for change.
It’s an once-in-a-lifetime opportunity.

We’ve seen it happening in Egypt, in Tunisia…
…and now, here, in Libya.

Not change brought about by foreign governments.
Not change brought about by traitors.
But change brought about by us, the people.

And there are some who are trying to resist that change.
So I say to you very simply:
Go back to your constituencies – and prepare for government.


Second Prize: Speech F Mugabe's Last Stand by Bryn Williams
The West proclaim the winds of change blow through Africa once more.
They can't contain their pleasure.
Their smugness betrays them.
It clings to every word.

But these aren't the winds of change that blew in the past.
The winds which freed us from the bonds of slavery.
The winds which spared us from the blight of exploitation.
The winds which saved us from the suppression of our colonial masters.

These aren't winds founded on freedom or liberation.
These aren't winds at all.

These are fires.
Fires fuelled by exploitation.
Fires stoked by the resource thirsty tyrants of the West.
Fires lit to incinerate the fabric of our culture.

The West have learned that regime change doesn't work.
Afghanistan and Iraq have failed.
They have failed for two reasons.
Their cultures, like ours, are unsuited to democracy.
Their governments, unlike yours, are under Western control.

The West have learned that regime change doesn't work.
They are not prepared to risk it a third time.

Zimbabwe,
Believe me.
The West are not empowering a change of regime.
The West are implementing a change of policy.

A return to the policy of the past.
A return to the policy of exploitation.
A return to colonisation.

If controlling the government doesn't work,
become the government.

You are hearing whispers of a better future from people who are faceless.

You are not hearing firm declarations from the leaders of the future.
You are not hearing solid plans to deal with the problems of today.
You are not hearing robust proposals to pay off the debts of the past.

Why are there no leaders
no plans and
no money?

Because they don't exist.

The whisperers exist.
The rumour mongers exist.
Enemies always exist.

Waiting to exploit you,
your family,
and your future.

Whether we like it or not
this policy of African exploitation is a political fact.

So I ask you to take a moment,
take a deep breath,
and take a step back.

Take a step back from the future of their making.
So, together, we can march forward
to a future of our choosing.

Could Clegg improve his impact with better speechwriting and rehearsal?

As is explained in my books and illustrated by numerous video clips posted on this blog, the contrast is one of the most important and reliable rhetorical devices for triggering applause in speeches. So it can often be instructive to look at 'deviant cases', where they don't work quite as smoothly as they could or should have done, to see what went wrong and what, if anything, we can learn from them.

There was at least one such example during the Deputy Prime Minister's speech winding up yesterdays conference of the Liberal Democrats in Sheffield yesterday after a simple past/present contrast:

Clegg: "We cherished those values in opposition. Now we're living by them in government."

But, as you'll see, the applause didn't start straight away and, when it did, after his first "So yes", it sounded somewhat lukewarm (i.e. not only delayed, but also lasting well below the 'standard' burst of 8 ± 1 seconds):


It could. of course, be argued that this merely reflected the audience's ambivalence about their party's involvement in the coalition government. But there were at least two technical errors without which it could have induced a much more prompt and longer-lasting response.

1. Better scripting?
In stead of using a pronoun ('them') to refer to 'those values' in the second part of the contrast, the speechwriters could have made the sequence work better by repeating 'those values', so that it read as follows:

"We cherished those values in opposition.
Now we're living by those values in government."

2. Better rehearsal?
A second reason why the audience delayed before applauding was that Clegg didn't stop immediately after the second part of the contrast, but rushed on to continue with "so yes-'.

This may have been because he was too glued to the words coming up on the screens and was 'teleprompted' onwards, or because he hadn't rehearsed it enough beforehand - or perhaps a combination of the two.

In any event, a rather crucial line only managed to prompt a delayed and lukewarm response, leaving him looking vaguely perplexed as to what to do next, other than repeating the same two words waiting there on the screens.

So what?
You might think that this hardly mattered on a day when the news was dominated by the Japanese earthquake. And you'd be dead right, were it not for the fact that this particular sequence was one of the few that actually did make it on to the prime-time news bulletins last night and, via ITN, on to YouTube.

Related posts
On delayed and/or lukewarm applause

Why I never signed the ThatchCard

Here's the latest discovery from my continuing office removal. I can't remember where it came from, but it was probably a gift from Lord Gnome of Private Eye.

Note that I never actually signed it - for the obvious reason that my interest in analysing political speeches meant that I'd have welcomed the chance of meeting her in her prime, for research purposes, you understand - and this far outweighed any sympathy I might have had for the message being purveyed by the ThatchCard's publisher.

What if?

Moving my office from one room to another has forced me to venture back into ancient files and make daily decisions about what to throw out and what to keep.

I'd forgotten that I still had this letter from the then secretary of the Yorkshire County Cricket Club inviting me to some Schoolboys' coaching sessions at Headingley. The deal was that, if they thought you were any good, you'd become a 'Yorkshire Colt', which meant that the YCCC would pay for your bus fare when you came for further coaching sessions. In short, we all knew that this could be the first step towards our sporting dream.


Coaches and autographs
When we got there, we had to line up and take it in turns to bat and bowl in the nets, closely watched by the two grumpy looking county coaches of the day, Arthur Mitchell and Maurice Leyland. Every now and then, one or other of them would growl "Next", which was, as far as I remember, the sum total of the 'coaching' any of us received.

Meanwhile, various current and former county players would wander around inspecting the 'talent'. They looked just as grumpy as Mitchell and Leyland, but their presence did at least give us the chance to collect a few autographs. Len Hutton's was the most impressive one I got, but I do remember being quite disappointed that he signed my book 'Leonard Hutton' - if only he'd read Wikipedia, he'd surely have known that he was 'commonly named Len Hutton'.

You'll have gathered, of course, that although I did manage to reach the Headingley schoolboy nets two years running, I didn't pass the Mitchell-Leyland test. So it's all their fault that I had to find something else to do when I grew up.

If only
Thirty years later, on discovering I might need reading glasses, I went for my first ever eye test - which also revealed that I had slight astigmatism. "Is that also age-related?" I asked, to which the optician replied "No, you'll have had it all your life."

Realising that, if only I'd had the right specs in 1955, I might have made it back to Headingley on a full-time basis. I was initially overwhelmed by depression, wondering what on earth I was doing in Oxford when I could/should have been coming to the end of a glorious career playing for Yorkshire. But then it dawned on me that there was quite a big silver lining after all.

The silver lining
Given my age and the fact that one of my specialisms was as an opening batsman, my dream coming true would also have condemned me to years of having to go in to bat as (junior/younger) partner to Geoffrey Boycott (who did have the right specs).

Compared with him, I suspect, even other academics were not only much more congenial as colleagues, but they also liberated me from a career that would have been plagued by the daily fears and frustrations of being run out.

Using video in a presentation: 7 steps to success

Over the last few days, I came across a couple of things that have prompted this post. The first was that I found myself giving a few tips to a Twitter follower on how to use video in a presentation.

The second was reading an interesting post by Lily Latridis on the Fearless Delivery blog , entitled Video in a Presentation can be a Big Mistake. At first sight, the title got me worried - as I hardly ever give a talk without using video clips to illustrate key points about public speaking and presentation.

It also reminded me that, when I first started using videos, we were still using Betamax rather than VHS - since when I've used them in hundreds, if not thousands, of presentations. What's more, I'm fairly sure that it hasn't been 'a Big Mistake' - unless feedback, course evaluations and repeat bookings are a completely misleading guide to audience reactions.

Fortunately, my initial sense of dread on seeing the title disappeared as soon as I'd read the post (HERE), as it turned out that the types of video Lily Latridis was warning against and the purpose for which they were being used were both very different from the the short clips used my own presentations (which mainly consist of 10 second excerpts from speeches illustrating different rhetorical techniques).

In fact, I found myself agreeing with pretty much everything Lily Latridis had to say about the types of videos she was talking about - and suspect that she might well agree with something I wrote about the use of videos in the section on different types of visual aids in my book Lend Me Your Ears (pp. 117-174):

'When using video, it's usually best to keep the clips short and the 30 second television commercial is a useful guide to optimal length. If you play longer clips, the danger is that the audience will start to feel that they're at a film show rather than a presentation. Once that happens, you may well find yourself losing the impetus, and have problems getting them back into the mood for listening to a talk. And, if it was a lively well-produced piece of video, there's the added risk of coming across as dull and amateurish compared with what they've just been watching' (LMYE, p. 152).

In retrospect, I realise that I could (and probably should) have included more practical advice on how to use video in presentations. So here, with thanks to Lily Latridis and my other Twitter contact for inspiring this postscript, are some tips from my own experience of discovering that video doesn't always have to be a big mistake.

SEVEN STEPS TO SUCCESS

1. Select clear examples
Many of the illustrations in scientific and medical text books are selected from hundreds of pictures in order to give the clearest possible example of whatever it is that's being described. The same principle should also be used in selecting video clips, as your audience has to be able to see/hear what you've told them to look out for instantly and at a glance (and without prompting doubt or irrelevant questions).

2. Use more than one clip to illustrate the same point
If you're making a point about the regularity with which speakers use a particular technique, you need to show more than one example of the same thing in action. By the time they've seen a third one, they'll have got the point, and you don't need four, five or six to convince them.

3. Think twice about who and what to include
When I first started teaching how to use rhetoric, I quickly discovered that, however effective an orator may have been, there were certain politicians and public figures who aroused such strong political reactions (e.g. Hitler, Ian Paisley, Arthur Scargill, Tony Benn, etc.) that their inclusion distracted audiences away from whatever technical point I was making.

So, whilst I still think it's important to show that the same techniques work in the same way irrespective of the party represented by a speaker, I've found it necessary to exclude certain speakers from my demo tapes over the years.

A related lesson I learnt very early on was to concentrate on showing clips by effective speakers and to make minimal use of ineffective ones. Hopeless speakers may demonstrate how not to do it, but the trouble is that what was boring in the first place is no less boring for the audience you're inflicting it on in the second place via a video.

4. Blank the screen out between each video clip
One of the (many) advantages that Betamax had over VHS was that, when you pressed the 'Stop' button, it stopped exactly where you stopped it and the screen blanked out until you pressed 'Start', when it carried on with the next clip you wanted to play. But do that with a VHS machine, and the tape would back up and, on pressing 'Play', you'd get a replay of part of the previous clip - which was, to say the least, extremely annoying and distracting (both to me and my audiences).

As the market forced us to use VHS, my initial solution was to press the 'Pause' button and then release it when I was ready to play the next example. The trouble was that having a still picture up on the screen while introducing the next one was a needless distraction for the audience. So I started to insert a few seconds of darkness on each demo-tape to encourage the audience's attention away from the screen and back to me until I was ready to 'un-pause' it and show the next exhibit.

Now that we have to use DVD players or laptops, I still make sure that the screen goes blank between each clip, as is illustrated in the following video from last year's UK Speechwriters' Guild Annual Conference (you can also see the notes of what I said each time the screen went blank HERE):



5. To embed or to edit?
As regular readers of this blog will know, I often include video clips to illustrate points being made in a particular post. The easiest way to do this is to 'embed' videos from YouTube or some other website. But the trouble with this is that the originals are often far too long and/or there's only a short excerpt from it that I want to comment on.

So you either have to tell readers how far to scroll in to see the point of interest (which I find quite annoying when looking at other blogs) or you can edit out everything else and produce a shorter clip of the relevant sequence.

The tips I found myself giving via Twitter the other day started by responding to someone who wanted to use video in a presentation and had tweeted a question asking if you can extract video from a DVD on to a Mac, to which I replied "Yes, I do it all the time but can't explain how in 140 characters."

As others have also asked me where I get clips from and how I edit them, it might be useful to outline how to go about it.

6. Where do you get videos from?
Thirty years ago, we had to record from live television - which produced very long video tapes and extremely time-consuming editing of short clips on to a demo-tape (using two VCRs). Today, we can either do the same by recording directly on to DVDs or select from the thousands of videos on the internet.

If you have a Mac, you'll be equipped with iMovie which, compared with Windows video-editing programs like Pinnacle, is far more reliable and much easier to use. Once you've edited a video, you can instantly convert it into whatever format you need (e.g. high quality DVD or lower quality for the web or email).

7. Useful software
If you want to copy movies from a DVD to your computer, you'll need a program like HandBrake that enables you to rip a DVD into QuickTime or other format that can be handled by iMovie.

If you've downloaded an FLV movie (e.g. from YouTube), Emicsoft FLV converter will convert it into an MP3 or other format that you can import into iMovie.

And anyone who thinks that this sounds like rather a long-winded process should remember that in the pre-digital age it could take anything up to two whole weeks to produce a half-decent demonstration tape.

Today I can create a new one from scratch in an hour or less - unless, of course, I need to fast-wind my way through hundreds of hours of videotapes before converting a long-lost clip to DVD before even being able to begin on the steps outlined above.