I can design and write a program that will either print out the words (or phrases) as a free-form card, as Ritter suggests, or these words can be associated with a particular subject, or these words can be associated with a particular person: journalist, politican, pundit.  Then by backtracking the particular person can be associated with the Thinktank, Public Policy Group, originating the phrase and the corporate ownership (funders) of those TT/PPG's.  The advantage would be one system could construct a range of cards from the very specific to very general on each different axis of information retrieval.

I'd guess A5 is a good size?

I'll mess with it this evening if I get a chance.

The more key words we pick up to customise it, the better. (We should aim for 25, although we might not need so many, I think A5 will be more rectangular than the posted example.)

A few spring to mind so far from Jerome's complaints:

Protectionist.
Fraying.
Sclerotic.

Most of the standard models for presenting Brand Stragies hinge around these concepts, even if not the exact words.

IMHO a far worse sin is to let visually illiterate people loose with Powerpoint. I prefer Keynote myself, but whatever you use, your presentation is only there to remind your audience where you are in the argument. Simplicity is all, and max. 5 lines. How many times have I seen the entire script up on the screen?

If you don't remember your argument, you shouldn't be there.

Only snacks and soft drinks are sold by technology - oh, and maybe sushi conveyors - it is people who sell things. By making people watch the screen instead of the speaker, you lose contact with them.

You can't be me, I'm taken