# data[].attributes.body
Yes Mantej?

Mantej where are you?

# data[].attributes.body
Similar to Peyi and many others, I think that the first presenter, Julian Treasure gave the best speech. The first impression that he gave the audience is that he is very confidence and articulate. I think this is through how he is able to portray himself by having a good posture and body language. He is also able to make eye contact with all the audiences and never forgets to give a few small jokes along the way to lighten the atmosphere and captures everyone's attention. He seems to be very well-prepared without a need to refer back to the slides or notes on hand. He also stressed at few important key words to help us understand the main points. Also, the content of his presentation is highly relevant to everyone and he made some examples that people normally faced which is good. He is also very interactive by asking audiences to do some exercises with him and he is very persuasive in the sense that everyone follow him so. Overall, he is very charismatic and confidence and that is what makes him able to give a good presentation.

As compared to the second speaker, the first impression he gave everyone is that he is not prepared as it can be seen that he is fidgeting, kept touching his face and so on. Also he is not coherence and kept pausing to look at his papers or think what to say next. The eye contact with the audiences are also not there. He is also hiding behind the stand and not willing to come closer to the audiences to engage them. He is too long-winded and said a lot of examples but failed to tell us the main point, which i have to re-watch a few times to understand. The last speaker, the content is interesting but sometimes along the presentation i am lost as the main points is not clearly brought across. He is engaging in a sense that he shown us videos to engage the audience and illustrate his point. He is more confidence and prepared compared to the second speaker, as he speaks more clearly without the need to pause and read the script.

Ms Chin- insightful views. So what are the useful pointers you can learn from watching all these presenters for your own presentation improvement?

# data[].attributes.body
I feel that the first speaker, Julian Treasure gave the best speech.Firstly, I like his presentation style. Before he began his speech, he looked fresh and confident.  Hence, the first impression he gave me was the best out of the other speakers. Secondly, he did not refer to any script and was still able to deliver his speech without any flaws. Thirdly, he engages the audience well. As the topic he presented was related to most people, he came up with a small activity to get the attention of the audience. In this way, the people will get less bored and more attentive to what he was presenting.
Personally, I didn’t like the way the second speaker presented. His first impression he gave was not as pleasant as compared to Julian Treasure. He looked exhausted and dreadful of what he was going to present. In addition, I believe that introduction to any presentation is very important. A good introduction usually capture the audience attention. Hence, I did not particularly like his presentation. However, he got better as his presented. He managed to capture my attention when he spoke about things related to our daily life, such as apple product by Steve Jobs. But, I would still mark him down on his introduction.
Finally, I feel that the last speaker’s presentation was better than the second speaker. However, i feel that he was a bit monotonous. Although he included videos to explain the topic he was touching on, the tone at which he presented made me feel sleepy. On top of that, his speech was also too technical  and hard for me to understand.
Hence, I still prefer Julian Treasure’s presentation, the best out of the three presenters.

Peiyi- what technique did you learn from the speakers in terms of presentation.

After watching these three presentations, I have learnt three new things. Firstly, our first impression during a presentation is very important. We should look confident of what we are going to say so that others will be more attentive and be convinced of what we are saying.

Secondly, we should try to engage the audience halfway through our presentation through a small activity. In this way, the audience will be more awake and enjoy our presentation.

Thirdly, when the speech we are going to present is too technical, we should think of a way to make it more understandable and less boring to the audience. We could improve the tone of our voice or show some real life demonstration for example on a physics experiment, if possible.

Thank you for your sharing.

(:

# data[].attributes.body
Hi Ms Chin I'm replied to your qn in my own thread! Sorry for the inconvenience!

# data[].attributes.body
I like Julian Treasure’s presentation the best. He is the
most interesting. He uses transition words like firstly and secondly which makes
his presentation easier to understand. His jokes can easily capture my
attention which makes his presentation more interesting. The engagement with the crowd further enhanced his presentation.

Vijay Kumar’s presentation is also interesting because of
the pictures and video that he used to support his presentation. However, I
started to lose interest when he introduced the physics formulas. Then, he tried to gain the audience attention by inserting video at the end. I feel like the videos are interesting which makes it easier to understand what he wants to say.

Malcolm Gladwell’s presentation is not that interesting because I find that the topic is not that interesting. Furthermore, the way he present did not capture my attention. When he wanted to state his points, he only used gestures or rather his fingers to point out the points. Sometimes, his gestures were a bit excessive which makes it a bit distracting.

Siti--this is a little brief...in which areas do the speakers like Kumar and Malcolm need to improve<\?

I feel like Malcolm could have a more variation in his tone and that he can have slides or pictures to emphasise his points. Like for example, Treasure used slides to emphasise of the 7 sins of talking and Kumar using video to explain the mechanics of the robot. Even though Malcolm try to relate his presentation by talking about the Apple product, I think that its hard to understand him clearly because I kept losing him halfway due to the way he convey his point. Maybe he can make it more lively.

Kumar's presentation is definitely interesting. I think it is hard to present about the robot as more interesting than how he did it. It is just due to the topic that I find it a bit lacking in capturing my interest. If I am more interested in robots, I would have choose Kumar's presentation to be the most interesting.

# data[].attributes.body
In Julian Treasure’s talk, it is interesting and engaging because of his use of examples and the way he did the warm-up techniques with the audience. Whenever he descibes something, he will use examples, such as in the case of pitch, he changed his pitch to a different one so as to show the difference. The pace of his speech is also just right for a listener to be able to listen well and understand him.

In Malcolm Gladwell’s talk, he made use of gestures and had much eye contact with his audience. This helps to engage the audience. Although he had stuttered a few times, the speech as a whole was coherent and engaging as well. He started from the past and went on to the present in his structure, which makes it easy for the audience to follow. He varied his tone in telling the story for the invention of the Macintosh, making it more interesting. He paused at some points to let the audience think about what he had said.  Overall, his speech was persuasive, with the use varying tones and volume, and we can tell that he does fully believe in what he is saying.

In Vijay Kumar’s talk, he started off with a simple joke, which brings in the audience’s attention to him easily. The use of clear presentations slides allows the audience to understand what he is saying easily.

Overall, I preferred Treasure’s talk. One reason is that even though it was a simple speech with the use of little multimedia, allowing me to just simply focus on him and what he is saying.  Even though Gladwell does use gestures often, some of his gestures appear too distracting. However, Treasure is able to make use of effective gestures which relates to he was talking about at that point of time. For Vijay’s talk, although his speech is interesting and can be understood easily, the use of various multimedia, especially the videos might be a little overwhelming. One reason is that the videos have audios that overlap with he is saying at the same time, making it hard for me to focus on both the video and his speech.

So what technique have you picked up for improvement in oral presentation?

I have learnt that simple variations in tone and pitch used will affect the persuasiveness of what I am trying to say. For example, using lower pitch and a deeper tone helps to increase persuasiveness of my speech. In addition, the use of excessive volume and gestures can be distracting for the audience, so a better way to present is to not use an overly loud voice and use gestures only when needed, like the way Treasure did in his speech. Each sentence used in a presentation should also end with a firm tone, so that it does not sound like a question for the audience instead, and would sound more convincing.

Thank you

# data[].attributes.body
I like Julian Treasure’s presentation best because of the following reasons. He tries to communicate with the audience and does activities with them.  Has content that links well to everyday life and presentation. He sets the context right from the very beginning, by asking the audience questions such that they will think before he gives them the answers. This makes them feel interested, and engages them as they would want to listen further to obtain the answers to the questions he asked earlier. He uses gestures to emphasize on his points. He varies his speed, tone and volume to get his point across and to make his speech more interesting. He also uses acronym to simplify concepts. He also does negative examples and positive examples to bring his point across, he varies the way he presents.

The next presentation that I like best is Vijay Kumar. He simplifies difficult concepts ,shows real-life application and uses videos. However his presentation wasn’t as interesting as the first speaker. This is me as the first speaker as he did not use his voice as well as the first speaker.  He didn’t vary the way he brings his point across throughout the presentation, so audience might get bored after a while.

Lastly,Iliked Malcolm Gladwell’s presentation the least. This is because He did not use any gestures, his tone was quite monotonous.  Even though he did emphasize on the main idea, the way he told the story about steve jobs wasn’t as interesting as the first speaker.He did not focus as much on engagement of audience to gather their attention.

Ren Wen--so what technique did you pick up from the speakers for self improvement?

I learned that it is important to vary the tone as speaking so not to bore the audience after a while. I also learned that to explain a difficult concept, one should simplify it for the audience to understand. To vary the way one present a point, one can also use negative and positive examples. Gestures when used appropriately are also important to connect better with audience.

Thanks!!

# data[].attributes.body
Hi Theresa, can you please provide a more detailed analysis of the speakers? Choose one to talk about in greater detail

# data[].attributes.body
Rachel, your analysis is too generic. Please provide ONE specific detail on how the speaker can attract audience. Is it content? is it voice?

# data[].attributes.body
Just consider
the speech, I like the first one (Julian Treasure). Firstly his voice is floating well, can
emphasize or skip over the parts he wants. And his body language is appropriate. So i think he is the best speaker. Also he interacte with his audiences well, this makes the presentation not so boring and the audiences always pay attention to him. In his opening, he firstly point out the importance of his presentation, then go through what's bad for presentation, then what's good, and so on... This makes the whole presentation well-organized. The logical floating is natural and easy to be understand. But for this kind of "skill-teaching" presentation, i think he can provide some examples of the good speaker in the end of presentation, and compare their speech with what he presents. this makes the speech more convincing.

The second
one (Malcolm Gladwell on Creativity) is quite bad. The volume of his voice do
not related to what he wants to present. This make people do not know what he what to
emphasize. And his body language is redundant and meaningless. I can always see
he is shaking he arms without any aim.

The third
one(Vijay Kumar), just consider his oral presentation, it is just so so. There is
not to many attracting point. However, he controls multimedia well. So this
makes audiences pay attention to what he is presenting. But I don’t think depend
on multimedia is a good way, since people will always pay attention on the
media and ignore the content of presentation. In fact I believe the media one speaker use cannot exceed the presentation itself. If use PPT or video, do not put all people want to say on it.

Kaiyu-did you read my comments above?

----oh i see

I think I can do more interaction (like eye contact and question-answer) with my audience. And the oral
English should be improved. Also my presentation should be more well-organized
to make a clear logic. Another thing is that, my voice should have more
floating on volume and speed. And the body language should follow the presentation
but not hidden my hand behind the body

Kaiyu-thank you for your sharing

is that all?

yes that is all.

Tahnk you

# data[].attributes.body
Ho Ying Chang, you are the mysterious writer!

Thanks Ying Chang for your sharing. Clear and concise...is there any particular trait that you find makes the speakers atttractive

# data[].attributes.body
I liked the presentation by Julian Treasure the best because firstly, i feel that his presentation style is more engaging with the audience. He has short slides that will allow audience to know his main point but not be overly attached to it and not listen to his presentation. I like how he gives short examples and jokes that makes his presentation not too dry. Secondly, he does not rely on any script and podium which allows the audience to see his body language and he is able to have eye contact with the audiences which will allow better interactions. His body language and gesture do relate to his speech which is worth learning. Thirdly, he had interactions like the exercise with the audience that makes me want to continue listening to what he has to share as it is much more interesting and engaging. Furthermore, after listening to a long speech, some people will be getting tired and restless, and he inserts a short exercise which will allow audiences to focus and be awake and will be able to continue listening to what he has to say afterwards.

As for the other two presentation, i feel that Kumar's presentation is too dry and technical, although the videos were interesting and engaging. His topic is new and allow people that are interested in robots to be learn something new. As for Gladwell's presentation, i personally didn't like the presentation as i feel that it is not as engaging and it is quite dry as he is limited to the space behind the podium. His voice does not attract me into the speech which is different from Treasure's voice. His actions and movement is too huge and unnecessary as some times.

# data[].attributes.body
Good morning!

I liked the presentation by Julian Treasure the best due to the following reasons. Firstly, his presentation is an example of Ted-style talks which are different from other presentations as the talks are professionally visualized with slides, videos and animations well-crafted. Secondly, his presentation was delivered without script which allow him to be more natural in his presentation. Besides, he delivered a topic that I am interested to know which I would like to master that technique. Furthermore, presentation 1 is more personal where the speaker feel more passionately about something and his sense of purpose is the one that gives the energy boost to the audience, as compared to the presentation 2 which is a business presentation which did not appeal to me as it mainly conveys about facts and expectations, not passions and possibilities. Lastly, presentation 1 is more concise than presentation 3 in terms of the duration of the talk while fulfilling the objectives of presentation 1 which is to get people listen while you speak instead of them tuning out on you

Further analysis:

As compared to the other 2 presenters, Julian Treasure gets the audience’s attention by coming up with jokes like explaining the negativity point by using the example of his mother's attitude towards the date 1st October and real-life applications where he also give examples and demonstrate them on his points presented on his slides like the part on variation of pitch and pace to speak well as well as warming up exercises to engage the audience in his presentation.

What we can learn from Julian Treasure's presentation is that we do not just keep going on about our points without bothering whether the audience is engaged or not. Sometimes we should include the humour factor to make the presentation more light-hearted and interesting so that we do not lose our audience as we speak for what we feel strongly for.

Rachel-did you read my comments above in the Ms Chin-Rachel box?

Yes Ms Chin, I read it. The 2nd paragraph I am working is my response to your comments above.

# data[].attributes.body
The third speaker, Vijay Kumar, who presented on "Robots that fly" appealed to me the most. Although the content in which he presented on was quite technical, he managed to increase his presentation's entertainment level through the use of video clips and pictures of the robots he presented on. Furthermore, he manages to transit his presentation content seamlessly from what the robots are, to why they are useful in today's context and lastly to how they can be used in the future to benefit us. This systematic breaking down of his presentation content greatly helps the audience to grasp what he is talking about. This suggests that the speaker had done a great job in planning for his presentation. He probably knew that the people he is going to speak to are not going to have the technical knowledge on robots. As such, he conducted his talk in specific parts and include various animation to aid them in their understanding on his talk. I didn't choose the second video because the speaker failed to use any sorts of animations to back up his presentation. For example, he could have included pictures of the computer graphics/mouse which Steve Jobs saw at the Xerox PARC. Although I didn't choose his presentation, the second speaker did a pretty good job in bringing his point across to the audience - urgency is key. By starting his speech with a story on what Xerox PARC is, and what Steve Jobs saw there, the speaker then linked it to how Steve Jobs went about developing his company's new products. Through this, he demonstrated how urgency is one of the most important ingredient to be successful. Steve Jobs isn't the one who invented the "mouse" or "computer graphic", but he is the one reaping the most benefits from it, simply because he see the potential value in it and untapped it before anyone else does. The first and third speakers are both interesting, but i opted for the third one because I felt that given the technical content in which he has to present, it is always going to be more challenging for him to present at a similar interesting level as the first presenter. As for the first presenter, Julian Treasure, he manages to include humors in his presentation which help him capture the audiences' attention. Besides increasing the humor level of his talk, his imitation of people who speak badly indirectly helps persuade people to listen to what he has to say. It illustrates to them why speaking in a proper manner is of great importance. I also noticed that he didn't exaggerate his jokes because he seems to already know that the crowd would be amused by it. His confidence is another reason why his speech is so captivating.

Ying Chang,, I had some comments for you in the above box.

# data[].attributes.body
Beyond evaluating Gladwell's Presentation

In my opinion, as always, we should find something about each personality speaking here in which we can learn to apply to in our daily lives. Upon further research, I found out that Gladwell's grades were not good enough for graduate school (as Gladwell puts it, "college was not an... intellectually fruitful time for me"), so he decided to go into advertising. He was subsequently rejected by every advertising agency he applied to and eventually accepted a journalism position and even went on to become who he is today- speaking at TED talks.

Indeed, we can learn much from Gladwell’s life as life is not all about grades. It depends on how one carries himself or herself in the workplace and how we manage to articulate ourselves and share valuable opinions with others. Albeit being a rather monotonous presenter, Gladwell’s attitude towards life is something we can learn from and take away in this lesson.

Well said Sara...thanks for your sharing

# data[].attributes.body
Good morning everyone! I feel that Julian (first speaker) did a great job in his presentation. His speech was very well organized and there was a good use of visuals to illustrate his ideas. He included  interactive exercises with the audience, had a good pace and  engaged the audience well. Although he did not have much gestures, he maintained good eye contact and used variation in tone to capture the attention of the audience, which helped him to deliver his message to the audience effectively.

As for the second speaker, I he presented his opinion through a story which was somewhat persuasive and informative. He had some variation in his tone but I felt a little distracted when he looked at his script a few times during the speech. Julian on the other hand, looked very confident as he did not have a script with him, maintained eye contact with the audience and engaged them at appropriate times.

The third speaker appeared a little monotonous and had minimal interaction with the audience. The subject of his presentation was a little technical but I felt that he could have improved on his delivery. Nevertheless, the organization of his speech was good as he illustrated his ideas with relevant examples and visuals that was convincing to the audience.

Personally, I liked the first speaker's speech as I felt that he had a meaningful message for the people, and delivered it well in a captivating manner.

Thank you!

Shahana- what technique did you learn from the speakers for your self improvement?

These are some things I have learnt from the speakers:

1. Learning to look confident in terms of not referring to notes, good posture, good pace and eye contact with audience.

2. Variation of tone and is important to capture the attention of the audience for example, silence as a powerful tool to stress the seriousness of a subject.

3. Mode of presentation for different subjects of presentation i.e., a story to impress upon people about a quality, videos as proof or evidence to illustrate a point

4. Leaving the audience with a meaningful or thought provoking message.

Thank you for your sharing.

# data[].attributes.body
Jenice who do you think you will find most convincing. Why?

# data[].attributes.body
The first speaker Julian is someone I wish to emulate because of his capability of compacting so much information succinctly and with much clarity. His presentation involved the audience as well (to try breathing deep, tongue exercises..etc) and this helps the audience to realize that whatever he has been saying about a good speech is doable by anyone in the audience and that was really encouraging. He demonstrated his point by playing it out even in his own presentation (point about the silence, the slowing down of pace, nasal sounds), and this helped the audience to better understand and remember his main points.

For the second video, I found Malcom Gladwell's forum a bit distracting especially at the start when he kept touching his ear. He also hardly smiled and sometimes when he spoke too fast his words were quite unclear. However, his intonation was really good, emphasis was placed on important words and had a lot of body expressions to place emphasis as well.

The third speaker opened his speech well with a joke, and had eye contact with the audience all the time. He emphasized his key words by slowing down and although he sometimes kept his hands in his pockets they were not there very long. His presentation was full of videos to explain the technicalities of a complex subject. He also had a good conclusion of what the robots could do.

Miss Chin I think I would find the first speaker most convincing because of his facial expressions and passion in his voice.

Dear Jenice, thanks for the sharing

# data[].attributes.body
Hi Malcolm, when you say the speech is quite dry can you be more specific?

Hi Malcolm are you there?

# data[].attributes.body
OK.

My favourite presentation is the one about robots given by Vijay Kumar.

In general I think both Vijay Kumar and Julian Treasure gave wonderful speeches. However I am more attracted by Kumar's topic.

He perfectly combined supplementary videos and his presentation together. Therefore though some of the contents was quite professional, he could explain these concepts quite clearly. He did not just talked about things like moment inertia and rotating speed. More importantly he directly told the audience what was the effect of changing these parameters. Therefore the audience may not know the definition of these concepts, they can still understand his work.

Well, both Julian Treasure and Kumar delivered speech fluently and confidently. But Treasure's presentation is less interesting. He did give us a clear interpretation about how to give a good presentation but sometimes language is subtle. Simple definition is not enough to tell the difference.

As for the second presenter Gladwell, I think it is better just listening instead of watching. He was very passionate and his presentation had a clear focus, but his gesture was not that well, especially at the beginning. His communication with audience is much less than the other two as he kept referring to his notes. But his voice could attract attentions.

And more importantly, Kumar is better at entertaining. Visual stimulation was quite effective in his speech.Though Treasure used activities at the end, but the previous part is not that attractive and the activity is not very engaging.

Sure, Ms Chin.

One of the most important technique I learnt is from Kumar's presentation about how to introduce advanced technologies to the public. Clearly logical deduction and calculations should be avoided. Kumar just listed the characteristic equations about his robots without further explanation then told the audience what were the related characters of his robots. Then he explained with videos. This is much easier to understand compared with teaching physics.

Well this seems not to be a technique...

Xinhang-Thanks for the sharing

Thank you Ms Chin.

# data[].attributes.body
Hi Amanda ...GREAT!

Start sharing in your box

Amanda..are you there?

Hi Amanda, you mentioned Treasure speaking to you..how so Was it the topic? was it the voice?

Thanks Amanda for your sharing. I like your comment about conviction...sounds like me....haha!

# data[].attributes.body
If I were to put topics aside and compare the speakers based on their presentation skills, I feel that the reason why Treasure really engaged me was because of the way he carried himself. In my opinion, a presentation that consists of too many tools i.e videos, demonstrations etc tend to be a little messy if not properly executed. I feel that he was able to engage me because he was comfortable speaking in front of an audience and everything just flowed naturally.

Overall I feel that the essence behind a great presentation is the presenter's own conviction of what he is presenting. One must feel and believe in the importance and greatness of the topic to be able to engage the audience during the talk, and create a lasting impact that will stay with them even after they leave.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I'm here!!!!

Who are you? Please identify yourself on the title column on top of your box.

Yes I am here! Just trying to figure out the commands haha

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

My favourite presentation was the one by Treasure. I feel that he executes his presentation effortlessly by just nailing the simple essence of a presentation i.e fluctuating his tone, use of appropriate hand gestures. I felt that he was really speaking to me rather than just speaking out loud.

I found Kumar's presentation slightly too content focused for me. I personally felt that his use of mathematical formulas and technical jargon was kind of overwhelming for me. Nonetheless I do feel that he deserves commendation for his delivery of such a complex topic. He did use multimedia to engage his audience and allow them to better grasp the concepts.

# data[].attributes.body
I too like Treasure's presentation the best. Its by far the most engaging one out of the 3 speeches. Firstly, he captures my attention because he uses a variety of voices/tones and gestures to engage the audience. I thought he started the presentation well. Furthermore, being a voice coach, he knows what kind of voice he needs to use to be able to engage the audience. He even touched on personal experiences.

The other 2 presentations were quite dry. Both were interesting topics. However, they failed to engage me. Firstly, its because Gladwell was sitting down, it made him seem less interested in his topic. He was monotonous and less prepared as he kept poring over his notes and hence did not manage to capture my attention for the full 8minutes.

Kumar's presentation was very interesting indeed because it gives us a glimpse of what the future will be like. He also used videos/pictures to illustrate what he was talking about, which was fascinating because i have not seen such technology before. However, i thought that his speech was too technical. He talked too much about physics ( all the formulas and definition) and therefore it got boring from there. Kumar definitely knew his field of expertise well and it is not easy to deliver a speech on the topic. If he could explain the scientific terms in more understandably I will definitely be engaged. Perhaps his audience were all scientists!

# data[].attributes.body
Great...you are in.

Your description is too brief. Can you share specifically who you do not like and why? Please type on the same thread which you habe created.

So Sara, who would you like to emulate as a speaker? why?

Hi Sara,,are you there?

Ah yes, I missed that part...thank you for your sharing Sara.

# data[].attributes.body
Who I would like to emulate as a speaker and why:

I would like to emulate Treasure as a speaker. This is because, by just using his voice and gestures he is able to capture the entire audience’s attention. This is shown by the audience's constant participation throughout the video, be it in terms of laughter or applause. There is a drastic difference observed, whilst comparing Treasure's performance with Gladwell's monotonous speech, which failed to garner any response from the audience.

I liked Julian Treasure’s presentation the best as his presentation was the most engaging as compared to the other 2 presentations. At the beginning of the presentation, Treasure uses powerful descriptors to talk about what the human voice can do to attract the audience’s attention. Not only that, what makes his presentation a cut above the rest is his frequent use of wry and witty humor to draw the audience’s attention to a point that he is making. This is seen when he uses his mother as an example to illustrate how negative speech techniques should not be used when conversing with others.

Evaluating Kumar's Speech on Unmanned Aerial Vehicle Robots (UAVs)

Kumar’s talk on Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAV) or flying robots was engaging. However, what put me off was the overly technical content, such as the mathematical formulas specifically used in engineering the vehicle. Upon further analysis, if this was applied to popular science novels, I am of the opinion that such information may be overly technical and complex for the general public to understand.

However, the conclusion of Kumar’s talk should also be applauded. They managed to successfully capture the audience’s attention by linking to the Los Angeles entertainment scene by creating a concert. Such a refreshing diversion allowed the showcase of the amazing capabilities of the UAVs and at the same time allowed for the audience to appreciate the team’s creations.
Evaluating Gladwell's Speech:
Treasure’s talk is by far the most clear as he breaks down the technical content such as register, timbre, prosody (which is the meta-language we use to impart meaning), pace, pitch and volume into the layman for the audience using animated actions and making use of his voice well in terms of variation, pitch, speed, volume, stress to illustrate his point. This is far more useful in engaging the audience’s attention as compared to Gladwell’s talk at the Nordic Business Forum in 2013. Gladwell’s talk albeit excellent in content, was lackluster due to his monotonous presentation, where often he would pore over his scripts before continuing his speech. Despite becoming very animated and making use of gestures, Gladwell only seemed zealous towards the middle of his speech when talking about Steve Jobs. Other than that, his talk overall failed to engage me as an audience.