The question, though, is why are you presenting live in the modern age in the first place? Perhaps 100 years ago there wasn't much choice but to form an assembl

The question, though, is why are you presenting live in the modern age in the first place? Perhaps 100 years ago there wasn't much choice but to form an assembly in a meeting room to present your information, but with all the technology we have today – and especially when you are working from home – that is completely unnecessary and counterproductive. A meeting can be very valuable, but only when the meting takes place after the participants have taken in the presentation and are ready to discuss it. After they've understood the material and have gathered any additional context needed to relate the information to the bigger picture. In my experience, when you do this the people involved will be much, much more engaged and you will see far more productive results from that. The "Let me bombard you with new information without the full context. Any questions?" meetings never go anywhere because the attendees haven't come prepared with the context they need. The people generally want to be engaged, but when something is sprung on them, it is hard to work with. Even when people do speak up, you can hear that they're struggling to relate it all together. Things are very different when it is an "after the fact" meeting. I suppose it is fun to reenact the past once in a while, but it is strange that we want to do it so frequently when it so clearly falls flat.