It's going to take a few years to unravel, but I suspect today marked a significant change in how I want to think and how I'd prefer to present what I think.A few years ago my friend Dmitri Cavander, a fantastic web designer and painter, got me interested in the work of Edward Tufte. I've rifled through a few of Tufte's books, but never found the opportunity to dig in. Until today.The gal at the registration desk (one of Tufte's four assistants) said there were "just under 500 people" present at today's "Presenting Data and Information: A One-Day Course Taught By Edward Tufte." This was his first of two days in Minneapolis—it speaks well of the Twin Cities that we have that many people interested in efficient display of information and clarity of design.(Interestingly, Tufte's assistants aren't his grad students; he hasn't been teaching at Yale for a while. Rather, they met Tufte by helping him with sculpture projects and yard work. He hires well. The course was flawless in terms of audio/visual, course materials and all that.)The price of the course includes hardbound copies of Tufte's four major books (The Visual Display of Quantitative Information, Envisioning Information, Visual Explanations and Beautiful Evidence). You're encouraged to arrive early and read a few selections before class. (I didn't manage that feat.)Tufte speaks gently, with wit, precision and grace. His style of rhetoric reminds me of the writings of the author Robert Grudin. Both are exceedingly well-versed in broad ranges of insights, experiences and knowledge; and keen to share.The course moves through selections from each of the four books. Lots to think about in the coming years. We covered the beauty (and really, the better practice) of using just nouns, numbers and simple arrows in presenting complex information vs. succumbing to the failings of Powerpoint. We learned about utilizing sparklines to simply convey vast amounts of numerical data.Tufte also emphasized trusting your audience's ability to understand (the human brain can read and comprehend much faster than it can hear), and advocated for empowering your audience by giving them a summary of your presentation before you present—and in some cases, instead of presenting.It's clear: Tufte doesn't much like Powerpoint. And for very good reasons. I'd always struggled with PP's inept design tools. Obviously spending so much time focusing on designing my presentations is proof enough I was using the wrong tool. I use Keynote now, but probably still spend too much time concerned with how words look versus what they actually say. Tufte's lesson: Focus on content. Focus on what you have to say, using the most efficient means of saying it. As he put it today, "Use PP (or Keynote) as a slide projector only."But I wonder. What about drama? I've given quite a few presentations around the subject, "What is the future of advertising?" My presentation format includes some paragraphs revealed over time (i.e. bulleting) and a bit of window dressing between major sections to help shift the mood. I use what's on screen as both a dramatic tool—to reveal a new point—as well as a foil for my running commentary. I think of it as a performance, with some value in the performing. And I seek to reduce what's on screen to a bare minimum. Is that effective by Tufte's definition? I think it has to do with content and context.Then consider those strictly business presentations: New business proposals, project summaries, campaign presentations. Here, I completely agree with Tufte, and look forward to stripping away many of the "extras" I've found myself using with clients. Time to broom the sequenced reveals, the transitional effects between slides. Time to consider brooming Keynote all together.Tufte gave an example today, which I'll paraphrase:

"Imagine you've got seven minutes with your boss to present something really important. First, take an 11x17" piece of paper, fold it once, which gives you four pages. Put everything down on that one (four page) document. At the start of the presentation, give your boss the document and ask them to read it, assuring them it should take about four minutes, and then there will be plenty of time to ask questions afterwards. Knowing people can read faster than they can hear, your boss finishes on time, and maybe asks a question or two—which you've been rehearsing for. Hopefully, you finish your 'presentation' ahead of the seven minutes. (What a gift for your boss!) And, of course, you leave a copy of your document with your boss, which they will probably return to."

It's about empowering your audience. It's about knowing they're smart enough to comprehend what you have to communicate—so you let them read, you let them control the presentation. It's about recognizing your content is more important than your presentation. Of course, this method requires you have to have your shit together, doesn't it? It means you've got to really know your content, have it researched and edited. No wonder so many presentations focus on the pretty nuisances.Again, it's probably not the right approach for every presentation—otherwise, Al Gore wouldn't have won that Oscar. But if I learned or reaffirmed anything today, it's to prioritize a presentation's content above the presentation style or methodology and (whenever it's appropriate) to empower my audiences with as much information before we start presenting. The ultimate goal—to create conversation as soon as possible.