Can Twitter make you a better presenter?

On one hand I agree with you Edward that is great not having to wait for feedback, or knowing exactly what stories spoke more to my audience. But i have to wonder, if I was the Presenter, would I be annoyed that my audience didn't have complete focus on me and the topics being discussed. Chances are if the audience is tweeting about what you are saying, they are also on facebook, linked in, e mail etc.: looking and doing many other different things during the presentation It would bother me if my audience only herd pieces of my talk. Just thought Bridget Dunne Departmental Seminar 2 Tusdays 9 am .-= Bridget Dunne´s last blog ..Can the iPad bring back print advertising? =-.

Maybe. Ironically much of social media's appeal is its *lack* of feedback. We can write what we want on Twitter and think 2,000 people are listening, when really most aren't tuned in. We can post whatever we want on blogs with no censor. We can upload videos and hope they go viral, while most won't. The very liberation that drives user generation of content is a result of the removal of normal feedback filters: bosses or editors can't say your work isn't good enough. We no longer risk failure, so we produce more. We take greater chances because no one can now stop us. So maybe instant feedback isn't always such a good thing. By all means, tweet about my speech, but I'm not certain I want to read the results. .-= Ben Kunz´s last blog ..Sometimes it makes sense to ignore your customers =-.

Yay Minnesota! On rare occassion I am so proud of my home state. Isn't the Fine Line fantastic?! I've seen some great shows there - happy to see they're using it for events like this too! Thanks for sharing, Edward. .-= Alison Morris´s last blog ..#NYFW Darlings | Tracy Reese =-.

Edward, you are patient in the face of the tweeting audience...being a twitterer yourself you know you are also listening carefully. Perhaps we have entered a period where full attention is not a sign of holding one's audience - as your piece describes. Being that I write and listen to either the radio or a with a sideways glance to a tv program the kids are watching...I know that I can do both but sometimes I wonder if I am cheating my main activity by splitting my attention (even in different percentages) to two (or sometimes more!) things. I am thinking of the days when news journalists RAN out of a press conference to call in the latest scoop. Also thinking about how women were given credit for their multi-tasking skills when going back to work while also continuing to take on most of the responsibilities for caring for a family. A bright thought...maybe these new devices have trained men to be as agile as women and family life can be balanced (as we see it becoming more and more) between women and men. The quest to be the "first one" to post what has just been seen or heard is exhausting...I can see that there will be those who are the first in line at the gate/tweeting and those who will sit back and look forward to creating a reflection/website or blog on what has been tweeted. Such an interesting time to be at the elder end of the game. melinda

Thanks for the post. Re your pt about instant feedback, I agree that there is value in getting it. However, the thing about instant reaction is that it is just that. I can remember seeing speakers and disliking or disagreeing with what they said at the time they said it. Subsequently however, with time to reflect my impressions changed. Time provides perspective. For this reason it is important to take real-time/instant reaction with a grain of salt. .-= Jackson Wightman´s last blog ..Spreading bad ideas =-.

Well done and a great way to fully engage your audience.