(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
