Response to Powerpoint Articles.

For my next assignment for Computer Mediated Communication, I had to read to articles about Microsoft PowerPoint. One article linked here explains how PowerPoint has a surface simplicity that hides a deeper medium that can be used to express artistic ability. The other article, linked here explains that PowerPoint is evil for its over-simplistic design and function. It also states that the use of PowerPoint to replace effective presentations ends up damaging the overall effectiveness of the information at being well-received.

My thoughts on the subject are as follows:

PowerPoint has a capacity to supplement a decent presentation and make it stellar. The artistic and creative freedom that is allowed in the seemingly restrictive application can create visually stunning slides with attention-grabbing music to accompany it. At the same time, however, the program can be used as (and is often used as) a crutch for the entire presentation. In this way the presenter usually does little work instead letting the program take the reins. The downside here is that PowerPoint is fantastic and generating generic templates that the presenter should BUILD UPON, not just rely on. Lacking any real creativity the user will create a completely bland and uninteresting slideshow that waters down the information so the audience either doesn't get the whole picture or they just don't care about it.

PowerPoint, like many programs, is as effective as a person wants it to be. It's up to the individual to understand that they have to put the effort in to make PowerPoint really shine as a teammate rather than try to make it the star athlete. I've seen some of the best and worst the program has to offer, and both are stunning in their own way.