If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Posterous)   Man gives sucky TED talk. TED opts not to publish the talk. Man goes full media censorship outrage troll. Internet falls for it hook, line, and sinker   (tedchris.posterous.com) divider line 149
    More: Stupid, TED Talks, TED, Good Stuff, rational decision, look and feel, trolls, National Journal, doughnuts  
•       •       •

12513 clicks; posted to Main » on 18 May 2012 at 8:46 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



149 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-05-18 08:31:36 AM
Everyday: I submitted this link with a different headline.
Priceless: Got credit for this greenlit even though it's not my headline.
Fark: My headline was trollier.
 
2012-05-18 08:47:22 AM
trollingmeantsomething.jpg
 
2012-05-18 08:47:24 AM
He does make some good points, but yeah, I've seen some much better TED talks

Here's the talk referred to in the article
 
2012-05-18 08:47:32 AM
TED didn't cite it's mediocrity, they cited its supposed "partisanship." Which it clearly is not.

TED looks like Koman coming out of this.
 
2012-05-18 08:47:36 AM

hinten: Everyday: I submitted this link with a different headline.
Priceless: Got credit for this greenlit even though it's not my headline.
Fark: My headline was trollier.


That's what editors do. Fun isn't it?
 
2012-05-18 08:49:31 AM
Ah reddit, I guess my assumptions about it being a whiny outlet for whiners was always correct.

/it does have a lot of good stuff though
 
2012-05-18 08:50:11 AM

DarnoKonrad: TED didn't cite it's mediocrity, they cited its supposed "partisanship." Which it clearly is not.

TED didn't cite it's mediocrity, they cited its supposed "partisanship." Which it clearly is not.

TED didn't cite it's mediocrity, they cited its supposed "partisanship." Which it clearly is not.

 
2012-05-18 08:50:45 AM

DarnoKonrad: TED didn't cite it's mediocrity, they cited its supposed "partisanship." Which it clearly is not.

TED looks like Koman coming out of this.


^^^^^ This
 
2012-05-18 08:51:56 AM

DarnoKonrad: TED didn't cite it's mediocrity, they cited its supposed "partisanship." Which it clearly is not.


Yea they did. They focused a bit too much on it being partisan, which seemed to be more of a subjective choice. But they specifically said there were better videos to post for that day and that it received average ratings from the audience.
 
2012-05-18 08:55:07 AM
THE FIRST AMENDMENT GUARANTEES MY RIGHT TO BE HEARD!
 
2012-05-18 08:56:55 AM

jakesense: But they specifically said there were better videos to post for that day and that it received average ratings from the audience.


It really wasn't a well planned or presented talk, but it doesn't look good for TED to claim that it only received mediocre ratings when the video shows the guy getting a standing ovation.
 
2012-05-18 08:58:09 AM

Raharu: DarnoKonrad: TED didn't cite it's mediocrity, they cited its supposed "partisanship." Which it clearly is not.

TED looks like Koman coming out of this.

^^^^^ This


FTFA: And it included a number of arguments that were unconvincing, even to those of us who supported his overall stance. The audience at TED who heard it live (and who are often accused of being overly enthusiastic about left-leaning ideas) gave it, on average, mediocre ratings.

Sometimes talks have good ideas and topic areas but just aren't that good because the speaker frames it incorrectly. The last part about how it will now be viewed as a conspiracy is funny because that is how the internet works.
 
2012-05-18 08:59:04 AM

IrateShadow: jakesense: But they specifically said there were better videos to post for that day and that it received average ratings from the audience.

It really wasn't a well planned or presented talk, but it doesn't look good for TED to claim that it only received mediocre ratings when the video shows the guy getting a standing ovation.

 
2012-05-18 08:59:45 AM
The precedent this sets is sucky. TED is going to have to post every video going forward. They wont even be able to highlight the good videos because someone will biatch about being censored or say that TED is pushing an agenda. It will become youtubeish in that you have to wade through a bunch of crap to get to the good stuff.
 
2012-05-18 08:59:52 AM

IrateShadow: jakesense: But they specifically said there were better videos to post for that day and that it received average ratings from the audience.

It really wasn't a well planned or presented talk, but it doesn't look good for TED to claim that it only received mediocre ratings when the video shows the guy getting a standing ovation.


The standing ovation could have been in response to him simply saying something that needed to be said. It doesn't necessarily reflect on the quality of the talk. Think about how often people praise millionaires for saying that they should be taxed more.
 
2012-05-18 09:00:21 AM

IrateShadow: jakesense: But they specifically said there were better videos to post for that day and that it received average ratings from the audience.

It really wasn't a well planned or presented talk, but it doesn't look good for TED to claim that it only received mediocre ratings when the video shows the guy getting a standing ovation.


I've heard plenty of standing ovations given for truly mediocre presentations. No contradiction there. Sometimes the audience just wants to reward the effort rather than the result, or sometimes they're just being polite.
 
2012-05-18 09:00:49 AM
So by this logic they're now censoring over 250 other videos? It's censorship gone mad!
 
2012-05-18 09:01:08 AM

DarnoKonrad: TED didn't cite it's mediocrity, they cited its supposed "partisanship." Which it clearly is not.

TED looks like Koman coming out of this.


It's premature to make that judgment without evaluating the substance of all the other talks TED rejected. The fact that this one talk was given by a person able and willing to deploy a professional-grade tantrum if he didn't get his way does not make his talk or its rejection special among all the talks not chosen.
 
2012-05-18 09:01:33 AM
I don't think the talk was particularly impressive one way or the other. What strikes me about this is that the guy claimed he was being censored, which he was not.
 
2012-05-18 09:02:45 AM

fonebone77: The precedent this sets is sucky. TED is going to have to post every video going forward. They wont even be able to highlight the good videos because someone will biatch about being censored or say that TED is pushing an agenda. It will become youtubeish in that you have to wade through a bunch of crap to get to the good stuff.


Just release all the less than stellar ones on youtube like this guys and keep the great ones on their site.
 
2012-05-18 09:03:29 AM

Lost Thought 00: THE FIRST AMENDMENT GUARANTEES MY RIGHT TO BE HEARD!


If you check out who sponsers TED you see it is the one percent. I'm real surprised a bunch of butt hurt one percenters tried to censor a lecture that dared to challenge their delusions of self importance. Also note the lecture was so mediocre it got a standing ovation.
 
2012-05-18 09:04:25 AM
Talk? Speech? What should we call it?
I liked it, whatever we call it.
 
2012-05-18 09:06:16 AM
TED talk? I'm giving one of those!

I'll just leave this here...
 
2012-05-18 09:06:18 AM

chookbillion: Talk? Speech? What should we call it?


manifesto is the most appropriate term, I believe.
 
2012-05-18 09:07:12 AM

DarnoKonrad: TED didn't cite it's mediocrity, they cited its supposed "partisanship." Which it clearly is not.

TED looks like Koman coming out of this.


The TED people think it was partisan. They run a private concern. Tough titties.

Komen actually lied to people. They made statements of fact that were, in actual fact, incorrect on their face. It wasn't a difference of opinion between Komen and the world, it was that Komen internally did one thing, and externally another. Komen is also a private concern, and could easily have said "Nyah, we don't care that you care. Wear a pink ribbon and STFU."

Komen also got biatchy and defensive when called on the carpet. TED is at least trying to do the right thing by explaining their position (and by posting a link to the talk).
 
2012-05-18 09:08:29 AM
I submitted this with a better headline! How dare you not post my headline?! CENSORSHIP!!
 
2012-05-18 09:09:12 AM

Bob16: Lost Thought 00: THE FIRST AMENDMENT GUARANTEES MY RIGHT TO BE HEARD!

If you check out who sponsers TED you see it is the one percent. I'm real surprised a bunch of butt hurt one percenters tried to censor a lecture that dared to challenge their delusions of self importance. Also note the lecture was so mediocre it got a standing ovation.


Every speech at a TED conference gets a standing ovation.
 
2012-05-18 09:09:24 AM
TED isn't the government.

If you want your views heard, start a blog on youtube like every other person who is unique and different.
 
2012-05-18 09:09:58 AM
I'm not familiar with the National Journal. Should I assume that it's one of those Liberal Media outlets, which purports to be unbiased, but in reality pushes the Liberal Agenda?
 
2012-05-18 09:10:03 AM

DarnoKonrad: TED didn't cite it's mediocrity, they cited its supposed "partisanship." Which it clearly is not.

TED looks like Koman coming out of this.


FTFA: At TED this year, an attendee pitched a 3-minute audience talk on inequality. The talk tapped into a really important and timely issue. But it framed the issue in a way that was explicitly partisan. And it included a number of arguments that were unconvincing, even to those of us who supported his overall stance. The audience at TED who heard it live (and who are often accused of being overly enthusiastic about left-leaning ideas) gave it, on average, mediocre ratings.
 
2012-05-18 09:11:09 AM
So am I the only person who doesn't have any idea what the hell TED is?
 
2012-05-18 09:11:41 AM
Actually this is another good example of the complete incompetence of the one percent ( who sponser TED ). The last thing they want is to see this lecture get wide exposure. Then they go about trying to censor it and it gets more exposure than any other TED lecture and they end up looking like assholes. Way to go geniuses.
 
2012-05-18 09:12:23 AM

bboy: So am I the only person who doesn't have any idea what the hell TED is?


Yes.

In other news, I want to know how I can get booked to do a TED talk. I am sure I could achieve mediocrity!
 
2012-05-18 09:12:38 AM

HeartBurnKid: I submitted this with a better mediocre, explicitly partisan headline! How dare you not post my headline?! CENSORSHIP!!


CTFY.
 
2012-05-18 09:12:50 AM
I like this strategy. Post the video, but biatch for 4 pages about how you were wrongfully characterized as partisan or some shiat. Sure makes the ted website PR people look both confident and mature.


/best course of action would have been just wordlessly posting the video with no commentary, or totally ignoring the whole fiasco. TED videos are still awesome, and will no doubt be sited by college dropouts, in arguments they don't belong in, for decades to come.
 
2012-05-18 09:12:54 AM
Irate Shadow: it doesn't look good for TED to claim that it only received mediocre ratings when the video shows the guy getting a standing ovation.

They were all cheering because they were happy it was finally over.
 
2012-05-18 09:13:12 AM
If we cant water board any more we should make terrorist listen to this guy speak over and over again.
 
2012-05-18 09:13:28 AM
Anyone who has watched a significant number of TED Talks knows that they're not exactly the sort of people to censor a talk about a controversial issue. They post a lot of different talks on a wide variety of issues, and a lot of them fall squarely within the "political range" of a talk on inequality. Hell, a lot of them are fairly radical in content.

Hanauer's talk, as mentioned by SmackLT, is a plain old political diatribe - it really isn't up to TED standards. It's cherry-picked charts, with very little actual information supporting the point. It's basically "we should tax rich people more because I don't think they create jobs." He could have done much, MUCH better with the same subject and a lot more thought in his commentary. Basically, it's a half-hearted attack on Republican and Democratic "job creation" theories, with some slanted commentary slipped in. It's also not that controversial, compared to a lot of TED subjects.

I'm not going to pick out TED Talks subjects that I think are controversial - go and look for yourself. It won't take you a long time to find something that you think is more controversial than Hanauer's little chat.

TED
 
2012-05-18 09:13:39 AM
That video started off in total "WTF" mode; compared to most TED talks, yeah, that was total garbage.
 
2012-05-18 09:13:59 AM

DarnoKonrad: TED didn't cite it's mediocrity, they cited its supposed "partisanship." Which it clearly is not.


You watch a lot of Fox News don't you? The talk was needlessly partisan, light on facts, and was presented with a competence that probably comes with spending years addressing rooms of shareholders and venture capitalists, but it lacked excitement and energy; it was mediocre.

/why would TED want censor this? Is it so hard to believe that they simply declined to publish it because they thought it wasn't very good?
 
2012-05-18 09:16:14 AM
 
2012-05-18 09:16:26 AM

Carth: Bob16: Lost Thought 00: THE FIRST AMENDMENT GUARANTEES MY RIGHT TO BE HEARD!

If you check out who sponsers TED you see it is the one percent. I'm real surprised a bunch of butt hurt one percenters tried to censor a lecture that dared to challenge their delusions of self importance. Also note the lecture was so mediocre it got a standing ovation.

Every speech at a TED conference gets a standing ovation.


Bwahahaha. Don't look now but you just showed the equivalency between this and all the other TED lectures. So the there is no reason to censor it.
 
2012-05-18 09:16:55 AM
Listening to the talk now... I agree with his stance, but he does a piss-poor job of making his argument, leaning hard on a number of logical fallacies. His speech is more like a FARK Politics Tab post than a TED talk.

Also, his Powerpoint sucks.
 
2012-05-18 09:18:45 AM
His points were nothing revolutionary. I completely agree with his stance, but the speech didn't inspire me, it didn't make me challenge an existing paradigm(because I already challenge it), it was meh.
 
2012-05-18 09:19:02 AM

Lost Thought 00: THE FIRST AMENDMENT GUARANTEES MY RIGHT TO BE HEARD!


No it does not.
The first Amendment means you can speak. It does not mean I need to listen or provide you with a megaphone.
 
2012-05-18 09:20:32 AM
The really funny part was that this blew up in TEDs face to such a degree that they had to release a statement to try to maintain some shred of credibility. So basically they pull the same shiat that the cops pull when they fark up. They announce that they have investigated themselves and found no wrong doing.
 
2012-05-18 09:21:01 AM
I thought this talk was better thought out than that idiot who had a rambling talk about beating a patent troll.

That would have been a good story but whoever organized it clearly drank too much Heineken.
 
2012-05-18 09:21:12 AM

Voiceofreason01: DarnoKonrad: TED didn't cite it's mediocrity, they cited its supposed "partisanship." Which it clearly is not.

You watch a lot of Fox News don't you? The talk was needlessly partisan, light on facts, and was presented with a competence that probably comes with spending years addressing rooms of shareholders and venture capitalists, but it lacked excitement and energy; it was mediocre.

/why would TED want censor this? Is it so hard to believe that they simply declined to publish it because they thought it wasn't very good?


I spent most of my years at community college watching a ted talk every night, from 2005-2009. They have a ton of "mediocre" talks, they have a ton of "light on facts" talks, hell, I've seen more than my share of downright strange talks from ted. There's no reason why this talk and/or all the talks shouldn't just be posted. Youtube covers the bandwidth, there's no reason not to. This whole thing just made ted look terrible, everything from the allegations of censorship, which would have never come to pass if they just posted everything, to the eventual budging with loud complaint that we're reading right now. They'd have been better off just posting the vid 5 seconds after this moron started trending, and being done with it, there at least would be far less people watching the video.
 
2012-05-18 09:21:15 AM

Bob16:
Bwahahaha. Don't look now but you just showed the equivalency between this and all the other TED lectures. So the there is no reason to censor it.


TED only publishes the best talks, this was not one of them; it isn't as if this one talk was singled out

/this is why we can't have nice things
 
2012-05-18 09:21:25 AM
whats TED?

/serious
 
Displayed 50 of 149 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report