Just recently, each of us at the Communication Institute has been granted a copy of Edward Tufte’s slim and visually appealing manifesto against PowerPoint, The Cognitive Style of PowerPoint: Pitching Out Corrupts Within. [PowerPoint from here on out is referred to as PP.] I am about three-quarters of the way through this nifty subway read, and so far find it thought-provoking as anything. Although one of his main complaints is that PP dumbs down detailed and dense arguments, he himself does a nice job of making a pretty strong argument in thirty-one 8 1/2 X 11 pages. I am in the process of compiling my list of Agreements/Disagreements, and I promise not to publish them later here in bullet format.
It is particularly interesting to think about his argument in light of the work that those of us who support communication intensive Business Policy Courses do. We work with students who are required to incorporate a PP presentation into their final analysis of a company’s strategies, strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, threats, and position in the industry. I expect to write more on how I think Tufte’s problems with the so-called ‘cognitive style’ of PP relate to our work with students. But in the meantime, check out these nifty links:
On December 16, 2003, I posted “PowerPoint doesn’t make you dumb. It very quickly exposes the dumbness that is already there.” on the Fast Company blog. You can find the thread here.
While I have the greatest respect for Tufte, to lay the blame for the inappropriate use of tool on the tool is too much to ask.
If one does not know how to think critically, nor know the fundamentals of organizing an argument, then any communications tool is likely to be poorly used.
Reply to James Drogan
I think the Tufte essay should be distributed to the enire Zicklin faculty. If nothing else, Tufte asks advocates of Powerpoint, “Why are you using this software?” “What pedogogical or professional goals is it uniquely able to meet?” Etc.
I must also respectfully disagree, in part, with James when he writes “to lay the blame for the inappropriate use of tool on the tool is too much to ask.” A main theme of Tufte’s argument is that Powerpoint as a tool is usually employed in tasks for which it is completely unfit. In these cases the “inappropriate use of the tool” is beside the point. Would we blame a worker who was unable to paint a wall with a screwdriver?
Reply to Ryan