TED, Reconsidered
Ah, TED talks. They boast the veneer of prestige, the promise of innovation, and many have gone viral seemingly irrespective of the actual merit of their content. What gives?
Ah, TED talks. They boast the veneer of prestige, the promise of innovation, and many have gone viral seemingly irrespective of the actual merit of their content. What gives?
UC San Diego professor and cultural critic Benjamin Bratton raises some provocative questions in this piece that takes a skeptical look, to say the least, at the self-help-inflected and tautological (e.g., What I’m about to say is extremely significant, because I say so and because you, eager audience, are in on it) subculture that in part gave rise to TED and that TED continues to build — one pithy line at a time.
The Guardian via BRATTON.INFO:
So what is TED exactly?
Perhaps it’s the proposition that if we talk about world-changing ideas enough, then the world will change. But this is not true, and that’s the second problem.
TED of course stands for Technology, Entertainment, Design, and I’ll talk a bit about all three. I Think TED actually stands for: middlebrow megachurch infotainment.
The key rhetorical device for TED talks is a combination of epiphany and personal testimony (an “epiphimony” if you like ) through which the speaker shares a personal journey of insight and realisation, its triumphs and tribulations.
What is it that the TED audience hopes to get from this? A vicarious insight, a fleeting moment of wonder, an inkling that maybe it’s all going to work out after all? A spiritual buzz?
Addendum: TED stands for “technology, entertainment and design.” Here’s a link to the home page, which offers clips from talks on a smattering of topics, delivered by ambassadors from the cultural vanguard sporting headsets and slinging tag lines like: “The $80 prosthetic knee that’s changing lives,” “Invest in social change,” and “What I learned from Nelson Mandela.”
The site itself, meanwhile, sets the bar high in summing up its offerings: “Riveting talks by remarkable people, free to the world.” You be the judge.
–Posted by Kasia Anderson
Your support matters…Independent journalism is under threat and overshadowed by heavily funded mainstream media.
You can help level the playing field. Become a member.
Your tax-deductible contribution keeps us digging beneath the headlines to give you thought-provoking, investigative reporting and analysis that unearths what's really happening- without compromise.
Give today to support our courageous, independent journalists.
Nice try there, Mr President Although he's gotten some lift before from the resuscitated publishing relic that is Rolling Stone magazine, Jann Wenner's music rag didn't give POTUS a pass for a cute idea his promotions team recently cooked up that offered designers the exciting chance (more).
British artist Richard Hamilton, whose work was highly critical of consumerism and politics, died Tuesday at 89 while preparing a retrospective of his art. Among his many achievements, Hamilton designed the minimalist white cover for the Beatles album that bears no name.
So, author-activist Naomi Klein has spent the last few days in Copenhagen, taking in the developments -- and appreciating streamlined and functional Scandinavian design -- at the climate summit, but she has a message for her Danish hosts: Cool it on the whole control freak thing, or the "Hopenhagen" conference isn't going to be a success.
Although they're allotted $100,000 to redecorate, Barack and Michelle Obama will spend their own money updating the White House. The first family has turned to Michael S. Smith for the task. The designer has worked for Steven Spielberg, Rupert Murdoch and former Merrill Lynch CEO John Thain, whose decorating habits have come to epitomize corporate greed.
You need to be a supporter to comment.
There are currently no responses to this article.
Be the first to respond.