TE
TechEcho
Home24h TopNewestBestAskShowJobs
GitHubTwitter
Home

TechEcho

A tech news platform built with Next.js, providing global tech news and discussions.

GitHubTwitter

Home

HomeNewestBestAskShowJobs

Resources

HackerNews APIOriginal HackerNewsNext.js

© 2025 TechEcho. All rights reserved.

The Cognitive Style of PowerPoint (2006) [pdf]

132 pointsby raviisoccupied5 months ago

14 comments

efitz5 months ago
Nobody has the patience anymore to be presented to or read in any form other than bullet points and low information density charts.<p>I grew up before computers and learned to communicate in the absence of all the short attention span distractions that exist today. I remember the first time I picked up a Wired magazine and couldn’t tolerate the insane lack of continuity. I still cannot stand the video style of images projected for a fraction of a second one after the other.<p>But no one has the patience for my storytelling style. Congratulations if you got this far, most people gave up if they didn’t grok my point in the first two sentences.<p>Yes slideware is ugly and low information and boring and insulting to the audience, but some people, particularly in higher levels of management, just want to be spoon fed bullet lists and then feel like they’re making informed decisions.
评论 #42572123 未加载
评论 #42572715 未加载
评论 #42571881 未加载
评论 #42571887 未加载
评论 #42573295 未加载
评论 #42573842 未加载
ipython5 months ago
Possibly unpopular opinion: PowerPoint is just a tool, and most people not only suck at making slides but are poor storytellers to boot. If you are a good storyteller and can effectively use the medium (as in, not just dump a bunch of bullets on a slide), you can actually convey a lot of information in a combined slide + narrative format.
评论 #42572413 未加载
评论 #42573450 未加载
评论 #42573237 未加载
评论 #42571863 未加载
Closi5 months ago
While this criticises PowerPoint - I don&#x27;t think it sufficiently outlines an alternative.<p>As someone that has tried to write a decision paper before rather than a PowerPoint deck, I found the main challenge was engagement (i.e. encouraging people to read it is a challenge, while a powerpoint can be walked through together).<p>I could present a spreadsheet, but that only addresses the financials or numbers and won&#x27;t address the business context.<p>And if you go into a board meeting empty handed to talk about a large investment - good luck!<p>I think it&#x27;s probably a case of horses-for-courses: Sometimes PowerPoint is a great format, other times it might not be, and like any format it can either be used well or poorly. The issue in the Columbia example wasn&#x27;t PowerPoint per-se, it was that the managers weren&#x27;t clear in their communication.<p>And while bullet points are poor in some ways - they are great in others. Distilling ideas down and making sure your list is MECE is part of clear communication and thinking.
评论 #42575600 未加载
评论 #42575254 未加载
评论 #42577486 未加载
zero_k5 months ago
This is by Edward Tufte. If you haven&#x27;t had the chance to check out Edward Tufte&#x27;s other works, in particular, the Visual Display of Quantitative Information [1] then I highly suggest you do. Every time I see a horrible graphic in a research paper, I redirect authors to [1]. It ought to be a must-read for anyone wanting to create a graph. Seriously, if you intend to display information, read that book. It&#x27;ll open your eyes to make you see the immense amount of waste of space and clutter that people introduce.<p>It&#x27;s basically an ode to clear, cutter-less, data visualization. Check out this timetable [2] (horizontal lines: stations, vertical lines: hours, diagonal lines: trains), and your mind will be blown. It&#x27;s compact, it gives you all the information you need, it can be navigated by your grandma (or your granddaughter) and it likely shows more information than most digital or paper-based system you have ever met, in a smaller format.<p>[1] <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.edwardtufte.com&#x2F;book&#x2F;the-visual-display-of-quantitative-information&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.edwardtufte.com&#x2F;book&#x2F;the-visual-display-of-quant...</a> [2] <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;miro.medium.com&#x2F;v2&#x2F;resize:fit:1400&#x2F;format:webp&#x2F;0*8zWuvtwylOB0kN2G.jpg" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;miro.medium.com&#x2F;v2&#x2F;resize:fit:1400&#x2F;format:webp&#x2F;0*8zW...</a>
评论 #42574482 未加载
EdwardCoffin5 months ago
Neal Stephenson has a funny anecdote about explaining PowerPoint to a friend of his who had managed to be unaware of it until now, culminating in Stephenson&#x27;s explanation &quot;for people who can&#x27;t communicate, it&#x27;s what a dialysis machine is for people who don&#x27;t have kidneys&quot; [1].<p>This is the culmination of his response [2] to a question [3] in the Q&amp;A period of a talk on his book tour for Seveneves [4]<p>[1] <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.youtube.com&#x2F;watch?v=rIHF6vDv8AE#t=40m20s" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.youtube.com&#x2F;watch?v=rIHF6vDv8AE#t=40m20s</a><p>[2] <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.youtube.com&#x2F;watch?v=rIHF6vDv8AE#t=38m46s" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.youtube.com&#x2F;watch?v=rIHF6vDv8AE#t=38m46s</a><p>[3] <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.youtube.com&#x2F;watch?v=rIHF6vDv8AE#t=38m06s" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.youtube.com&#x2F;watch?v=rIHF6vDv8AE#t=38m06s</a><p>[4] <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.youtube.com&#x2F;watch?v=rIHF6vDv8AE" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.youtube.com&#x2F;watch?v=rIHF6vDv8AE</a>
thom5 months ago
Slides are cursed with multiple audiences and lifetimes. After an initial persuasive speech, perhaps some new initiative gains momentum, and the slides are often the first and only relic associated with The Project for quite some time. They are a cultural artifact onto which many beliefs, hopes and dreams are projected in ways that are not at all evident from their content. Minions are asked by their managers if this thing is actually possible or desirable. Vendors are asked to pitch in. If you’re very unlucky you’re asked to start estimating for the thing and you’re sat, puzzled, thinking “but this is just some bullet points?” Sometimes the detail only comes later once things are signed off and someone is made accountable, and it’s that poor soul’s job to go back and find out exactly what gaps everyone has filled in inside their heads.<p>I don’t actually think PowerPoint is responsible for all this, I think it’s just people are often too lazy to create more structure and depth at the right time, and transition to something else.
projectileboy5 months ago
Is there some reason why Edward Tufte isn’t being properly being credited anywhere? This is copyrighted material.
评论 #42573451 未加载
senko5 months ago
There&#x27;s no single &quot;style of PowerPoint&quot;. People use it for various, different, things, and if you look at a deck made for one purpose through the lens of another, it&#x27;ll look atrociously bad.<p>You can use PowerPoint (or Google Slides, etc) to make:<p>* Make visuals for your talk (in person, or over zoom); your talk is the main thing, and the backing visuals are there to focus people on what you&#x27;re saying. Those kinds of slides often have a single sentence, image, chart, or code block. Importantly, those slides carry no meaning&#x2F;story by themselves - you can&#x27;t look at that deck without the talk itself.<p>* Handouts, or material to send over email, etc., in which the slides themselves are a thing (you might not be there to talk about them, or you can expand some of it as a follow-up). Slides are tightly packed with information, which needs to be carefully organized. They&#x27;re usually bottom-line up-front (google BLUF), with on-slide info organized in pyramid fashion (google MBB slide structure).<p>(Edit to add: people often want to reuse the same slide deck for both uses, compromise on it, and end up with the worst combination. Nobody wants to do things twice over).<p>Diametrically apart, optimized for different things; if you&#x27;re skilled at making those, can be super-useful. Trouble is, it&#x27;s a <i>skill</i> that very few people are tought how to do. We expect people to be able to create and deliver a presentation without teaching them how to do it.<p>So what most non-experts end up doing, is what&#x27;s in the linked book excerpt:<p>* pick a template you like<p>* add a bunch of bullet points where each bullet point is a paragraph of text<p>* fumble about with creating a chart that&#x27;s only obvious to you (visualisation is a different skill in itself!)<p>* read the slides, slowly, while having your backs turned to the audience<p>Yeah, that&#x27;s torture.<p>But it&#x27;s not caused by powerpoint, same like spam is not caused by email. It&#x27;s not because slides are inherently a worse format than articles or books (different, yes, and not for the same thing). It&#x27;s just that people legit <i>don&#x27;t know better</i>.
评论 #42574561 未加载
评论 #42573622 未加载
评论 #42574356 未加载
kopirgan5 months ago
In 80s I had to create in Harvard graphics, print on white paper for boss to QC ( he can&#x27;t walk over to your desktop), rinse, repeat then finally get printed in transparencies.<p>Unless his boss has more changes.<p>Now it&#x27;s so easy to create so much crap.
OldGuyInTheClub5 months ago
I&#x27;ve loaned my hardcopy of this classic to many people in my industry. Regrettably it has not had any impact and Powerpoint still runs rampant. I am not a Tufte fanboy but this article hits perfectly.
评论 #42571532 未加载
评论 #42572706 未加载
Paddywack5 months ago
I often tell my people to “stop decking around”, or “don’t be a deckhead”…
MathMonkeyMan5 months ago
I can put together a good powerpoint presentation -- one that isn&#x27;t just bullet points and fluff.<p>It takes me forever. It&#x27;s like preparing for a talk at a tech conference. I spend hours and hours off the clock refining the slides, the script, and rehearsing the timing.<p>Nobody&#x27;s going to put in that effort if they have to present multiple times per quarter, especially if they know that nobody cares and that it doesn&#x27;t really matter anyway.
enugu5 months ago
Some of Tufte&#x27;s criticism of slide bullets is not specific to PowerPoint, but could be extended to software which work with nested nodes like Roam&#x2F;Workflowy(software which I like). Workflowy, in fact, allows you to convert a tree of nodes into a linear presentation. Wittgenstein also wrote his classic books as numbered nodes (though not nested).<p>Indeed, this can also be seen as a critique of structured code editors vs text editing. Mathematics books also follow tree structure a bit, (Def 6.3.1, Example 6.3.2), though there often is some connecting narrative.<p>The point about oversimplification to fit into a single slide is specific to PowerPoint. But, the critique that organization into discrete nodes often skips over an underlying narrative or a causal structure which connects the nodes is more general.<p>What can be said in defense of discrete organization? Firstly, the overall narrative is not initially apparent. Listing the pieces together can help to discover this structure.<p>Secondly, in long essays, the larger point often gets buried in the details. This is especially true in mathematical works where the purpose of a complicated definition&#x2F;result is only seen a long time later. This also happens in source code, where a lot of preprocessing obscures the central purpose of a function (though of course, source code is not a candidate for a report with sentences anyway).<p>By forcing these documents to become less dense, the narrative actually becomes more apparent. Whereas with a dense document, the reader&#x27;s attention can wander away before the punchline.<p>One issue that Tufte seems to not discuss in the oversimplification critique is that attention&#x2F;time is limited. Since an organization leader cant read all reports 3 levels down the ladder (either usual style reports or nested trees), there needs to be a strategy for marking specific reports as important and also to mark which details from the document need to be passed on to higher levels of decision making and which details should be only relevant to middle managers.<p>In the Columbia report, the problem is not oversimplification but that the critical conclusion was mentioned as a low level detail whereas a methodology of choosing a &#x27;conservative&#x27; model became the heading.<p>Could a usual technical report have avoided this issue? The &#x27;conservative&#x27; phrase could well have been a section heading and the damage indicated in sentence buried inside the section. But a technical report also has a &#x27;Conclusion&#x27; section which could have forced the authors to state their position clearly. This &#x27;Conclusion&#x27; section is implicitly a protocol for which information in the report has to be passed up to a higher level. IPCC Reports have a &#x27;Summary for Policymakers&#x27; in discrete points (<a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.ipcc.ch&#x2F;sr15&#x2F;chapter&#x2F;spm&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.ipcc.ch&#x2F;sr15&#x2F;chapter&#x2F;spm&#x2F;</a>). Tufte, for some reason, doesn&#x27;t like &quot;Executive Summary&quot;.
评论 #42574342 未加载
cheschire5 months ago
Meh.<p>What’s the meeting about? That’s the more important question.<p>Is this a decision making meeting? Is there one person making the decision or several?<p>Is this instead informational in nature? Are people supposed to understand the gist from this and do deeper research afterwards? Or should they come to the presentation already informed in some way?<p>PowerPoint is primarily a method for the speaker to organize their story, and secondarily for the audience to have visual landmarks to aid memory.<p>If you do anything else, you’re probably not planning your meetings properly.