The truth is, I've never been a big fan of the Q&A portion of the speech. Mostly, questions are either veiled statements or deliberate speaker-stumpers. I'm less of a Q&A fan than ever, now that it's better called the Q,Q&A. Because suddenly, everyone who asks one question, asks two.
"I have a two-part question!"
"I actually have two unrelated questions!"
You would think that no one who has been in the speaker's situation would ask a two-part question. And surely no speechwriter would do it! Yet, many if not most questioners at the 2019 World Conference of the Professional Speechwriters Association last week asked two questions.
Here's what's wrong with the two-part question: You're not only putting speaker on the spot in front of dozens or hundreds of people by asking them a question they may not have anticipated, but you're making the speaker memorize your first question, consider your second, then answer one of them and then (somehow?) answer the other!? Meanwhile, the crowd struggles to focus on the content of the exchange while simultaneously gauging the speaker's ability to juggle chainsaws on a unicycle.
I ask you honestly, customers and colleagues and friends, because I do not know the answer: Is it that you simply cannot decide which of your two questions is more important? Or has CNN's Jim Acosta made it seem somehow unassertive to ask a one-part question?
Or is there a third answer: You've simply never been a speaker before and you can't imagine what it's like to arrive, gasping, at the end of a talk you've prepared months for, and be Gatling-gunned to death by the audience, two questions at a time?
If I was the moderator at an event like yours I would say at the start of the QA session that we will only entertain one question per person per speaker to give more people a chance to ask questions. A lot of the time they're only asking questions to hear the sound of their own voices anyway, not because they care about the answer.
Posted by: Gerry | October 30, 2019 at 07:07 AM
It was ever thus, Gerry. And actually, I accept that function of the Q&A—to let audience members have a moment to say their own thing on the topic. A speech IS a community experience, and "I have a comment and a question" is OK with me (and we pray that the comment is germane).
But two questions, no—especially now that it seems to be becoming a fashion thing. "Did you hear Fred, during the Q&A? HE GOT THE MIC AND ONLY ASKED ONE QUESTION. WHAT A CHUMP!"
Posted by: David Murray | October 30, 2019 at 08:03 AM
Good point about the community experience. I have, however, cringed when seeing certain people coming to the mic, but I was consoled by knowing that others were cringing too.
Posted by: Gerry | October 30, 2019 at 09:21 AM
I once had the temerity (or was it sympathy for the audience!) to tell a notoriously long-winded dialogue dominator that he would be allowed to attend my conference only if he promised to remain mute during the Q&A. He agreed.
I'm OFTEN torn, during my conferences, between wanting to give everyone a chance to be heard (especially, after all, members of the silent profession at their one annual platform!) and wanting to end, for the rest of the audience, a social hostage situation.
Posted by: David Murray | October 30, 2019 at 09:33 AM
I don't envy that element of your professional life. Other parts, maybe....
Posted by: Gerry | October 30, 2019 at 10:30 AM