Sebastian Wernicke showed up at TED Active in Southern California to reverse engineer the most successful and disastrously awful TED talks around in the hopes of finding the formula for creating the best TED Talk possible… What’s interesting about his talk is how much truth is embedded within the talk from appearance (slightly better dressed than average, glasses, longer than average hair), to using more positive than average language, to the visual mood the presenter creates using color… these seem to be not only traits of good TED Talks, but of any presenter anywhere. We’re more apt to listen to the guy/girl that looks cool, that pumps us up with positive language and uses colors that stimulate our visual cortex than we are the sloppy looking dude that looks like he just rolled out of bed, is angry and doesn’t use anything visual at all.
So, what does this look like in preaching? What does this look like in reciting poetry or any public presentation? If you want to be liked follow these specific lists/rules?
I wonder what the perfect sermon construct would look like if it were reverse engineered like this… and could it still be called a sermon?
Related posts:
- Separation between Church and State…
- the office | quote of the week
- crazy statistics
- exactly.
- can you afford to be poor?
dude, that’s awesome. and absolutely use this when crafting your sermons. i know i don’t need to convince you of this, but perhaps some of your readers. A sermon is simply content delivery. Some guys have the content, but no delivery. So, it doesn’t stick.
Great tips!