Erläuterungen der Energy Charts des Fraunhofer-Instituts für solare Energiesysteme: 2023 kamen 55% des deutschen Strombedarfs aus erneuerbaren Energien, die Kohleverstromung ist deutlich gesunken. Der Verzicht auf Atomkraftwerke war keine Ursache dafür, dass Deutschland in diesem Jahr mehr Strom importierte als exportierte. https://www.handelsblatt.com/unternehmen/energie/strommix-deutschland-so-abhaengig-ist-deutschland-von-stromimporten/100002618.html

Montag, C., Sindermann, C., Rozgonjuk, D., Yang, S., Elhai, J. D., & Yang, H. (2021). Investigating Links Between Fear of COVID-19, Neuroticism, Social Networks Use Disorder, and Smartphone Use Disorder Tendencies. Frontiers in Psychology, 0. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.682837

This is, of course, one obvious way of showing ethical listening. But let's remember there are other kinds of feedback too. Cheers and boos, for example.

Remember there are two kinds of listening postures being discussed here: the kind that helps you, and the kind that helps the speaker. I'm sure many people can lie down and be attentive listeners, but unless you show something to the alternative, it doesn't mean the speaker can tell.

It's natural to come into a listening situation with your mind already made up on particular ideas about the speaker, the topic, etc. How are you making sure you are opening yourself back up to critical thinking?

In other words, limit the noise on your end.

Of course, second language listeners have an extra challenge of language processing to consider, yet still are expected to be ethical listeners. How do you adapt yourself to a second language listening situation?

Of course, this message gets complicated in an asynchronous, digital context. How might a YouTube viewer be an unethical listener?

Even in monolingual circumstances, communication takes place. Poor listeners - and obvious ones at that - should not complain at a speaker's presentation if their own biases or distractions interfere with receiving signal.

Remember that as you are free to share your view and form of expression, others are as well.

One frequent assumption of most speeches is that someone out there doesn't know, or doesn't 'get it.'

It's also hardly inclusive, isn't it?

Sort of like "we're all in this together."

Your ability to recognize other points of view, other stakeholders and other relevant persons goes a long way towards establishing your credibility.

Some students forget this one. ALL content that you borrow for a presentation must be cited.

My rule of thumb: Paraphrase ideas and quote interesting language or expression. Anything you cite should be used for making your own rhetorical point.

All three types count as bad ideas.

Understand the difference between common knowledge and ideas. If it's something you and others have known, it may be common knowledge. If you learned that from someone, you might need to identify that source.

The only important difference between spoken plagiarism and written plagiarism is the former is perhaps harder to distinguish. If you are caught copying, you still look bad.

We're seldom interested in misleading or inconsiderate speeches, and we rarely need to sit and listen through it all.

In other words, what you put into it becomes what we'll make of it. Poor preparations will make for a poorly received speech.

This entails that the speaker has a responsibility to not simply be considerate of delivery. It is quite possible to be considerably knowledgeable and yet an unethical speaker.

If morality is about standards, ethics is about considerations.

We connect civic engagement to ethical engagement as a recognition of each other. If both members of a debate care for virtue, even in their disagreements, then how they treat each other's communication and ideas is of importance.

And what defines good sense, good will and good morals? Culture, for a start, and context for another. Understand that in a philosophical argument, all ethics are negotiated, yet built on human and societal influences.

Relevant to your presentation, what are your enticing your audience to do after you have finished? Can they look up something on their phone, or contact you for more information?

We understand class presentations are usually mandatory for audience members, and their interest in your topic will greatly vary. How can you get them to consider the WIIFM aspect?

Realize that this always shows. The audience can always tell when you don't care.

Don't assume your audience will be satisfied with just any source. If I can tell your source came from someone's blog, I might use that in determining your credibility.

Good presentations always show strong source usage. Good presenters are always prepared to discuss them in reasonable detail, especially during Q&A.

Consider why an audience member heckles a comedian. One reason is that heckler is a jerk, but another possible reason is the comedian has messed up. The rest of the audience will side with whichever fact is more apparent.

Let's think about this in a class presentation contest. Your antecedent credibility will be the expectation we have that you've been developing an amateur yet academic understanding of your topic. Your consequent credibility will show us that understanding.

Trust your audience that a credible delivery will be informative and persuasive. Don't count on theatrics or gimmicks to highlight the urgency or interest of the topic

Try adjusting your delivery to an imagined split audience. Assume some viewers will be skeptical and others approachable.

Do you want to focus on persuading while informing, or informing that leads to some persuasive arguments? Considering this early impacts your outlining and delivery.

Reconcile this right away. The objectivity of your informative speech most often comes out of your tone and commitment to making audiences aware of the topic's complex nature.

This is closest to where you'd want to go with an interactive presentation. It's probably the most forgiving of mistakes, it encourages outline and goal focus, and most importantly, it's the easiest style for allowing you to communicate with your partner.

Some adoption of the memorized style is a good idea, but you should reserve that for the denser material (like lists of information or heavy statistics and quotes). Going verbatim could lead to real stress, especially if you lose your spot.

Being impromptu does not mean lack of preparation. Impromptu is more about knowing what you will discuss rather than how you will go about it. In other words, you really need to nail your topic and be comfortable with your performance style.

This style is a poor idea for interactive presentations. The more you rely on a script, the more you limit opportunities for flexibility and responsiveness.

In testing your equipment, you're going to want to think about how you sound. Do not assume your audience will forgive you for bad sound, or watch more than once.

You absolutely need to test and re-test your equipment as you prep your presentation. Assume a mistake very much can happen.

Obviously you don't have a real podium for this presentation, and yet you are still stationary, in a forced position.

In this presentation, your room is both physical and digital. Our view of you taking this space is distinctly informed by your camera and microphone.