Recently I watched a TED talk done by speaker Alex Kipman on the topic of modern technology, more specifically the topic of holograms. He went on about how today’s society, despite being as advanced as we currently are, are still like the cavemen, first discovering charcoal and making markings on cave walls. No one in today’s day of age wants to be behind on the latest and newest technology, so by claiming that we are still living as though ancients, people are more motivated to listen and acknowledge.
Continuing in his presentation, Kipman proceeds to demonstrate the Microsoft HoloLens. By doing so, he provides the audience with visuals of what technology can really accomplish. Although while this was occurring, I found myself more focused on the holograms being displayed rather than what the speaker was actually presenting, leading me to simply assume the speaker was saying relevant and intelligent things. Upon rewatching the presentation, I focused more on what Kipman was saying rather than the demonstration itself. When I did this I realized that Kipman was simply repeating the same ideas, just in different context. I found it interesting how convincing the speaker was when putting the displays along with his presentation of ideas. Imagery seemed to add a sense of entertainment, which helps by capturing the attention of the audience and helping to get your main ideas across.
Kipman brings to the stage a hologram of Dr. Jeffrey Norris, from NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory. Not only does he appeal to credibility by doing so, but he appeals to the audience in the sense that it captures the attentions and amazes them. I feel as though this was an effective way to bring the research and ideas of Norris to the presentation because it was interesting and entertaining. Once this demonstration occurred, people wanted to hear more about what this holographic figure had to say.
Overall, despite repetitiveness in his speech, Kipman presented his main points in an effective manner by using displays and demonstrations that appeal to the wonder and amazement of the audience, which effectively captured their attentions.
Pshhh... Ridiculous. Oh no no, not the holograms, Kipman, not a very good speaker from what you've pointed out, Hannah. Thanks for the insight and for preventing me from thinking that this guy took Rhetoric class.
ReplyDelete