TOK presentation =more than 16 on oral plz post them here:)

My presentation dealt with misleading (purposely making other people believe something untrue) the ethical implications of misleading, and whether misleading can be ethically justified. The objective of the presentation was to make my classmates more aware of the problems of misleading, and pointing out to them how easily they can be misled.

To demonstrate my thoughts about the ‘theory of misleading’ (that there must be two people involved, that there must be a lack of knowledge among those who are mislead, and that the one that is misleading must possess some kind of authority), I started my presentation with claiming that my cooking chopsticks actually were an ancient Chinese weapon. Most of the class seemed to believe what I said, and the example proved to be an excellent attention-grabber. When I then announced the topic of my presentation, and that I had actually misled them, many seemed eager to know more about the topic. I used a simple diagram to illustrate my thoughts about the theoretical part of misleading, which helped me to communicate my reasoning in a clear and logical manner. Finally, I talked about how biased American television news reports were when reporting on the American war on Iraq, and used the findings of a survey that showed how ‘misled’ viewers of different news networks were about fundamental facts on the war. This issue seemed relevant and important to my audience, and I think it was a good example of how misleading is used practically in the media.

Since many people were eager to discuss the issue afterwards, I guess that I succeeded fairly well in making my presentation engaging and thought-provoking. In general, the presentation was well-organised. I am content with the introduction, but quite unsatisfied with the last part, which I had not worked through or practised a thoroughly as I would have wished. Initially, this part must have seemed very confusing to my audience, and I felt the need to explain it again, which took unnecessarily long time. I tried to approach the issue from two different points of view, but failed to communicate this explicitly. If I were to do this presentation again, I would work especially on making the last part more comprehensible and easier to follow.