I just came across the youtube video of Annie Duke’s testimony before Congress on an internet gambling bill that attempts to ban online gambling in the US.  For those of you unfamiliar with Annie, she is the top female professional poker player, a mother of three and a PhD graduate of Columbia University, where she received a grant from the National Science Foundation.  Obviously, from that description, she is not the typical poker player, mother or PhD recipient.  She is really not typical in any way.  But, she is someone that a lot of very different individuals can relate to in one way or another, which is why she makes such a great candidate for testifying in front of Congress.  But, once there, she really showed herself to be great in another area – as a presenter.  I have included the video in this post, but here are some things I think she does particularly well in her testimony:

1)  She establishes her credibility on multiple levels early in the presentation.  The first thing you should be concerned about as a presenter is getting the audience to relate to you, to feel some connection with you.  She does this by including all of her different titles in her introduction.  Congress is a diverse group of individuals with a number of different concerns.  So, she does not depend solely on her title as top female professional poker player or her title as mother or her title as PhD recipient, but instead shows how they all are an important part of her history and who she is.  In this way, she establishes a connection with those in favor of gambling, those who are concerned with family and those who are looking for impressive credentials from academia.  She is able to establish herself as a credible individual without the least hint of hubris or condescension. 

2)  She references icons of American political history.  Again, this is a way of identifying with her audience.  These individuals are serving in the “hallowed halls of Congress” where history and patriotism abound.  She is able to draw on icons such a John Stuart Mill to make a connection with her audience.  But, importantly, she is able to draw a logical connection between these icons and her advocacy.  Many speakers make the mistake of referencing or quoting individuals whom they think the audience will feel a bond, but they do a poor job of tying that to their particular advocacy.  Most audiences will see through this pretty quickly and not appreciate the “sucking up” that is being attempted.

3)  She does a great job handling the questions and answers.  There is an entire series of Q&As that Annie Duke participated on youtube and she shows herself to be not only well-spoken, but also quick on her feet and able to speak with clarity on short notice.  When testifying before Congress, you do not have the ability to get the questions submitted to you before hand to prepare answers (unlike Presidential “debates”), so you have to be able to think quickly and put together answers that make sense and are informative in a very short amount of time.  I was impressed with Annie’s ability to do this.

For these reasons, I think that Annie Duke stands as a model presenter.  Argumentation and persuasion are, in my opinion, the most difficult presentations to make effective.  After all, you are often times dealing with a hostile audience who will easily ignore or discard what you have to say.  But, Annie does a great job of establishing connections, using relevant and attractive references and dealing with questions/challenges.  I think we can all learn a little something from this PhD-poker-playing-mom!