I'm a little bit picky about the public speakers I want to hear. I'm really not inclined to waste my time if the speaker doesn't follow certain criteria. It's a little hard to take instruction from him or her if his or her speech is sprinkled with ain'ts and she don'ts, for instance. And, if a disconnect happens between what is proposed and what is real, I'm out. The two reference points are too different from each other. If I hear too many You ought tos, then my mind checks out for sure. The number one criterion for me is not to ask me to raise my hand for any reason. Speakers think that is a point of engagement with the audience, a type of participation that keeps the audience listening to him or her. I won't raise my hand for any reason in an audience. The speaker either has my attention or (s)he doesn't. Raising my hand doesn't show that I am engaging with the speaker. I have been known to walk out if speakers do that too much.
If I am listening to a speaker, first and foremost, I am there to be informed in some way. So, inform me. If the information is something I need, then I'm all ears. Another reason I might attend a public speaker is to listen to substance. Wasting my time with fluffy stories that bear little relevance to the substance I am there for is inconsiderate. Most of the time informing me using substance is enough for me to act in a certain way if I deem it necessary. So, the practical part I respond to is if the speaker gives a variety of ways for the substance to happen in, not with inexperiential or poorly thought through methods of implementation.
In this day of video presentation, public speakers are few and far between for me. Increasingly, I choose ones that present using media. A droning voice can get old after about 20 minutes. Needless to say, I don't go very often to see a speaker.
No comments:
Post a Comment