I guess I don't really get it... How are powerpoint slides any different than flip chart sheets? It seems to me that either thing can be used illustratively by people who do know what to say, or as a crutch by people who don't.
The cost of editing flip chart sheets is huge in time and inconvenience. It forces me to actually think about them in advance and do them right, rather than the typical powerpoint method of creation; copy some text from a completely unsuitable document, add bullets points and then start removing words.
I quite doubt EliRivers is responsible for all powerpoint presentations across the world.
Their point is that flip chart edition acted as a filter on garbage production, as editing a flip chart is time and labor intensive more time goes into planning and whittling down the amount of stuff to show, as well as into preparing the presentation itself. Powerpoint does the opposite and facilitates the production of huge streams of garbage quickly, resulting in exactly what we can see.
And sure you can still state that it's the user's fault, but here's the thing: the user has been a moron all along, it took your tool for the user's stupidity to become damaging. When your tool empowers stupidity and you refuse to acknowledge basic reality, your tool is at fault.
The story doesn't make it clear how the flip chart is being used. Any time I've seen flipcharts used in a presentation, they were not pre-created, but rather blank and the person drew on them while they spoke.
If that was the case in the story, then it would explain how it might be less distracting than pre-made slides.
