These past few days have found us leapfrogging the ancient capitals of Europe on a speaking tour as a part of a responsibility as a member of the board for the Austrian Economics Center in Vienna. Among those on the docket were Bucharest, Athens and London (thanks to my colleagues who tolerate Skype and late-night email as the sole paths of communication back home). Each city designated for our little roadshow warrants four or five international guests buttressed by a slightly larger domestic contingent. Today in Brussels, we are from the US, UK, Austria, Argentina and Honduras. In a week’s time, one is exposed to many, many speeches; and an array of opinions equally abundant.

Style and content vary widely. Some are entertaining and others deliberately eschew humor and rely only on dry data, imagining, one supposes, that even the remotest jocularity might diminish the gravitas with which their desired message is conveyed. It is notable that others find parable and anecdote to be the most effective way to reach the assembled audience. The best find balance.

Weaving both cold fact and personal warmth are among the very most effective methods. So how much latitude can one take in making a point before she dances on the edge of veracity? When is puffery simply the route to efficiency and when does it become deception? The Romanians clung to figures. Each presentation was a study in PowerPoint precision. The Greeks robustly and captivatingly advocated with a near evangelic zeal. While the Brits, ever true to form, employed restraint and erudition to carry the message. It makes me wonder about our American “style.” Do we stray too far from fact when attempting to entertain or do we cling too closely to data and fail to ever make the point?