(Photo
Illustration
by
Thomas
Fuller/SOPA
Images/LightRocket
via
Getty
Images)
SXSW
is
not
only
about
technology
but
it’s
also
about
filmmaking,
storytelling,
and
marketing.
Multiple
panel
discussions
explore
how
to
craft
compelling
narratives
and
connect
with
an
audience.
One
panel
I
attended
focused
on
techniques
from
live
theater
that
can
create
deeper
audience
engagement.
Another
explored
how
data-
and
AI-personalized
marketing
can
build
stronger
customer
connections.
Both
discussions
centered
on
persuasion
in
the
digital
age,
where
audiences
have
clear
expectations
about
storytelling,
the
tools
used
to
tell
stories,
and
how
people
should
be
reached.
These
topics
are
particularly
relevant
to
me
as
a
former
trial
lawyer
and
a
faculty
member
who
helps
teach
lawyers
how
to
best
integrate
technology
in
the
courtroom.
Performance
and
Technology
The
first
panel
was
entitled
Performance
and
Technology:
Changing
the
Audience
Experience,
and
was
led
by
Bobby
McElver,
a
sound
designer
from
UCSD,
and
Andrew
Schneider,
an
artist.
McElver
and
Schneider
shared
two
key
insights
that
apply
directly
to
what
lawyers
do:
persuade
people,
whether
in
the
courtroom
or
elsewhere.
Start
with
the
Story,
Not
Technology
McElver
emphasized
that
artists
should
never
begin
by
selecting
technology,
even
though
audiences
expect
it
to
be
used.
Instead,
they
should
start
with
the
story
they
want
to
tell
and
then
use
technology
to
enhance
that
story.
As
McElver
put
it,
“If
the
tech
doesn’t
enhance
the
story,
we
use
something
else.”
I
emphasize
this
same
point
in
my
trial
persuasion
technology
course:
if
lawyers
don’t
start
with
the
story
they
need
to
tell,
no
technology
will
make
the
story
resonate.
Too
often,
lawyers
not
experienced
with
technology
try
to
force
the
technology
into
a
case
rather
than
letting
the
story
drive
the
choice
of
tools.
Engagement
Over
Explanation
The
second
key
point
was
even
more
interesting.
McElver
and
Schneider
stressed
that
a
good
story
doesn’t
just
tell
people
something
—
it
immerses
them
in
an
experience
they
wouldn’t
otherwise
have.
As
Schneider
put
it,
“There’s
a
difference
between
telling
someone
something
and
putting
someone
through
something.”
To
illustrate
this,
Schneider
shared
an
example.
He
had
to
convince
a
well-known
museum’s
artistic
board
to
approve
an
unconventional
idea:
hiring
actors
to
put
on
an
unannounced
performance
outside
the
museum.
His
pitch
was
that
people
would
be
drawn
to
what
appeared
to
be
everyday
individuals
engaging
what
appeared
to
intriguing
activities
—
without
knowing
the
individuals
were
performers.
He
had
planned
to
outline
the
idea
in
a
presentation
on
his
computer,
but
when
he
began,
his
computer
appeared
to
crash.
In
a
moment
of
“panic,”
he
suggested
that
the
board
members
go
look
out
the
window
to
get
an
idea
how
observing
people
strolling
the
museum
grounds
would
be
interesting.
The
board
members
noticed
things
like
two
individuals
walking
in
near-perfect
sync,
pausing
simultaneously
to
check
their
phones.
They
saw
groups
talking
in
earnest
and
others
engaged
in
seemingly
random,
yet
captivating,
activities
along
with
other
interesting
interactions.
Then
Schneider
revealed
to
us
the
twist:
his
computer
had
not
actually
crashed.
The
people
outside
were
actors
he
had
hired
in
advance
to
demonstrate
his
concept
in
real-time.
Guess
what:
the
board
enthusiastically
embraced
his
idea.
His
point
was
clear
—
he
let
his
audience
experience
the
power
of
his
proposal
rather
than
just
explaining
it.
Lawyers
should
take
note.
Persuasion
isn’t
just
about
presenting
information
—
it’s
about
engaging
the
audience
in
a
way
that
makes
them
feel
the
argument,
not
just
hear
it.
Whether
addressing
a
judge,
jury,
client,
or
opposing
counsel,
we
need
to
focus
on
getting
people
to
feel
they
are
part
of
an
experience
that
makes
our
case
compelling
and
personal.
Personalizing
the
Approach
The
second
panel
I
attended
explored
how
major
companies
—
Samsung,
Lyft,
U.S.
Bank,
and
Billboard
—
are
using
data
and
AI
to
customize
marketing,
creating
more
relevant
and
personal
experiences
for
consumers.
The
goal
is
simple:
different
people
respond
to
different
approaches,
and
technology
helps
tailor
messaging
to
individual
preferences.
McElver
and
Schneider
hinted
at
a
similar
idea:
what
engages
one
audience
in
a
play
won’t
necessarily
work
for
another.
The
same
principle
applies
to
persuasion
in
law.
What’s
the
so
what?
There
is
no
one-size-fits-all
argument.
Lawyers
trying
to
persuade
a
jury
must
recognize
that
different
arguments
resonate
with
different
people
in
different
ways.
A
strong
case
isn’t
just
about
what
you
say
but
how
you
say
it
in
different
ways
that
resonate
with
different
people.
Secondly,
lawyers
should
use
data
and
AI
to
understand
their
audience
better.
Historically,
lawyers
have
relied
on
gut
instinct
to
understand
their
audience
and
tailor
their
arguments.
But
today,
technology
can
provide
insights
into
jurors,
clients,
and
decision-makers.
AI-driven
analytics
can
help
predict
which
arguments
will
be
most
effective
with
different
people,
much
like
businesses
use
AI
to
personalize
marketing.
One
More
Thing
As
I
was
wrapping
up
this
article,
I
had
the
opportunity
to
attend
a
SXSW
session
featuring
Eddy
Cue,
Apple
VP,
and
Ben
Stiller,
producer
of
the
hit
show
Severance.
Both
shared
thoughts
that
simplify
the
key
to
effective
storytelling
and
persuasion.
Stiller
put
it
this
way:
“If
you
want
to
tell
a
good
story,
you
need
to
establish
an
emotional
connection
between
the
characters
and
the
audience.”
Cue
added,
“One
reason
Severance
is
so
popular
is
that
the
audience
has
an
emotional
investment
in
the
story.
It’s
personal.”
This may
be
the
most
critical
lesson
from
the
panels
I
attended:
persuasion,
whether
in
storytelling,
marketing,
or
law,
is
about
forging
an
emotional
connection.
Make
it
personal.
Stephen
Embry
is
a
lawyer,
speaker,
blogger
and
writer.
He
publishes TechLaw
Crossroads,
a
blog
devoted
to
the
examination
of
the
tension
between
technology,
the
law,
and
the
practice
of
law