TED Conversations

Bob Stiglitz

This conversation is closed.

Is TED white washing corporate propaganda?

I've made comments trying to expose Adam as someone as a shill for wall street and they keep getting deleted because it would harm adams reputation.

Adam has known conflicts of interest and questionable integrity as a "journalist".

http://shameproject.com/profile/adam-davidson/

TED likes to bill itself as "open minded" but anything that opposes the deeply fundamentalist free market beliefs of TEDS backers tends to get deleted. This is not the first time I've exposed peoples conflict of interest and trying to tell TEDSTERS that something is rotten at ted and they should take certain TED talks with a large grain of salt.

TEDS audience reaches many people who are not literate or historically well read enough to see and distinguish corporate propaganda.

The whole "fiscal cliff" crisis was manufactured and is total propaganda. But you won't hear that at TED.

Fiscal Cliff "Crisis" Manufactured to Prey on the Weak

http://therealnews.com/t2/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=31&Itemid=74&jumival=9326

Share:
  • thumb
    Dec 23 2012: Bob,
    You are "trying to tell TEDSTERS that something is rotten at ted...."?

    Do you think that most TEDSTERS are not smart enough? Not intelligent enough? Not Insightful enough, or informed enough? You have to tell us how things are? We "should take certain TED talks with a large grain of salt"? Do you think/feel that we cannot choose how to take and use information all by ourselves?

    Does that feel at all arrogant to you? It does to me. You are going to show us the way? That is funny!!!
  • thumb
    Dec 23 2012: It's great they have finally let you in, Bob. I have not noticed too much of a censorship here, but I am not saying there is none. What is more perplexing to me is the general lack of critical thinking. Patting everybody on the back is nice but it gets us nowhere.
    • thumb
      Dec 23 2012: Do you have a theory, Jedrek, for why critical thinking is uncommon in public spaces? While some may attribute this perhaps perplexing phenomenon to lack of developed skill in this area, I believe there is an important element of choice in it. Is there, for example, a stigma (outside of a few settings) associated with analysis or careful thought and a glamor associated with the reverse, including quickly stated unsupported claims?

      Do you have a hypothesis?

      I know I have spent much of my life in contexts in which critical thinking was expected and tolerance for fluffystuff was very low. I have been in other settings in which critical thinking was accepted but fluffy stuff as well. And I have been in settings in which fluffy stuff was the norm and critical thinking wasn't even tolerated (as, I was once told, it interfered with people's ability to hang out and relax!).
      • thumb
        Dec 23 2012: I agree with you Fritzie, but do not take it for patting on the back!

        I do not know how much is the lack of critical thinking the result of a stigma and how much of good manners.
        Because one reason could be this: critical thinking is not delicate to put it mildly. On a forum like this, where there are many strangers one does not want to sound impolite. The consequence of this is a general acknowledgement and acceptance of each and every idea.
        • thumb
          Dec 23 2012: I would say that ideas which are sincerely put forward are worthy of acknowledgement as a person's ideas, but acknowledgement and accepting the truth or soundness of these ideas are two different things.

          I think you are right that people often hesitate in being outspoken with strangers, because they do not know whether the stranger will take it as rudeness or personal attack.

          I think too that people often choose the most productive places to put their energies. For example, if someone clearly has prejudices from which the person will not budge and the person has little serious influence as an opinion maker or decisionmaker, those who may privately review that person's ideas with a critical eye might just leave it alone in terms of responding to it. The same critical thinker may engage seriously and with high energy 'where it counts."
        • thumb
          Dec 23 2012: Jedrek,
          Critical thinking CAN be expressed just as much with back-patting, respect and kindness. One who possesses these communication skills and qualities is not necessarily lacking critical thinking. Whether we express our own critical thinking delicately or not, is a choice we all make. Accepting each and every idea IS NOT a consequence, unless we choose it to be so. We do not have to express our individual "critical thinking" in a disrespectful way.

          Fritzie,
          I agree that most people choose where, when, why and with whom we spend our energy:>)
      • thumb
        Dec 23 2012: Fritzie,
        Are you seperating those who practice or speak "critical thinking" from those who practice or speak "fluffystuff"?

        I have also been in many settings where critical thinking AND fluffy stuff was intermixed, and that is my favorite.....that is truly freedom, and comfort.....IMHO:>)
        • thumb
          Dec 23 2012: No, Colleen, I am not separating people into types. I am distinguishing discourse about ideas or professional-type discourse from more strictly social conversations. Example: I walk in the park and have friendly conversations with people about their dogs and when the kids are coming home... but I typically don't talk with people I bump into in the park about challenging ideas. Here on TED I would not inquire about people's dogs or when the kids are coming home or share these aspects of my life.
      • thumb
        Dec 23 2012: Fritzie,
        Perhaps I misinterpreted...you write...

        "I know I have spent much of my life in contexts in which critical thinking was expected and tolerance for fluffystuff was very low. I have been in other settings in which critical thinking was accepted but fluffy stuff as well. And I have been in settings in which fluffy stuff was the norm and critical thinking wasn't even tolerated (as, I was once told, it interfered with people's ability to hang out and relax!)."

        You say..."it interfered with people's ability to hang out and relax". If you are "distinguishing discourse", as you say, which prevents people from hanging out and relaxing, are you not seperating people into catagories as well?

        I'm not trying to find fault here....simply having a discourse, and apparently we are different in that respect. I like to participate in conversations that unfold and evolve no matter where I am....walking in the park and conversing with people I meet, have produced some of the MOST intriguing, interesting, in depth, conversations based on critical thinking. I don't limit where, why, when, or with whom a very interesting conversation might evolve:>) My biking buddies are always kidding me about the fact that I connect and start talking with people EVERYWHERE! They often ask me....;do you know that person?......well I do now!!!.........I LOVE IT!
        • thumb
          Dec 24 2012: I am not separating people into categories. I participated in a site at one time in which the host suggested that analytical comment with supporting evidence and so forth was at odds with people's being able to hang out and relax. I am not saying such conversation inteferes with my ability to relax or, in fact, to anyone's. I said only that the host of the site discouraged such a mode of discourse on the basis of that argument.

          I walk really fast and do not tend to get into serious conversations with others in the park, who tend to be moving much more slowly or who are running. I am sure others stop longer or converse seriously while running. Public spaces accomodate individuals' choices in this regard.
    • thumb
      Dec 23 2012: Hi Jedrek,
      I have not noticed too much censorship of ideas. I HAVE noticed censorship of disrespectful, demeaning, abusive comments, which TED has CLEARLY said they will delete. Patting people on the back and critical thinking are not mutually exclusive....do you think?
    • thumb
      Dec 23 2012: Jed.

      I thought Bob has been on this forum for quite a long time? If he can find a new york times article on David then yes, i would look closely at it but since it has no impact on my personal economic situation or my countries current future growth or contraction then it purely comes down to what Bob states with links.

      I know of one local radio hosts story that seems eerily similar to what the links suggest.
  • thumb
    Dec 22 2012: From my experience with TED I dont think there is a deliberate attempt to shut out certain ideas; except ones that are not presented in a manner that sustains the dignity of the organisation and the community.
    So, its not just about having a nice or grand idea; its not just about having questions worth asking. The presentation of such is very important. Its about respect.
    It also turns out that some people expects TED to be what it is not, and those people get bored and complain when it does not fit into their ideas.
    It is not a perfect platform, but it has contributed immensely to education and enlightenment and thought-provoking questions.

    Unfortunately, it is possible to build conspiracy theories where there are none, if one is too mindful of such.
  • Dec 22 2012: If you haven't been involved or observing TED for very long

    Relative to what is was in 2009 and what you are witnessing to-day, last week ...its content and quality has dropped to being a low level social media site with very little content and participation. The New Yorker Magazine did a very unkind article in the summer which I am sure did critical damage $$$ -wise to the TED site.

    On any given day it is the same 20 people ...very predicable content and responses ...from the same few.

    True TED admin. has come on and asked "how can we make this better?/ what would you like to see/have" good indications that $$$ problems are a brewing. And this is certainly not new...many many Social media sites have come and gone ...it is not a lose because the same will spring up else where ...blossom and die ...such is the nature of Consciousness.

    I tend to agree with you on your "Fiscal Cliff Crisis" is Manufactured" .....and 90% of my "reason for" it that it ...the underlying generation of US debt" has existed for at least 60 years.....the word "Crisis" is a convenient word thrown in for dramatic effect ......and its effect was short lived....much like a TED topic come to think of it.
    • thumb
      Dec 23 2012: Ed, Do have a link to that article? save me a few imagined pico seconds in my imagined expanded universe.
  • thumb
    Dec 21 2012: You do realize I, and many others, are reading your tirade on TED? That seems to disprove your assertion. Why don't you rein-in the accusations and post a crisp, candid, and relevant idea, question, or debate? There must be some basis for your high opinion of your ability to "distinguish corporate propaganda". Show us a specific, provocative example, please sir. Thank you!
    • Dec 21 2012: No it doesn't disprove my assertion because many of my comments were deleted.

      I would not have had to post this as a debate. It got through but that still doesn't change the fact they deleted many of my comments when I posted the same thing as the above.

      The fact that they deleted my comments when I posted the above is proof that whoever is moderating comments has issues. I imagine whoever was moderating comments on adams video and whoever approved this thread are not the same person.
      • thumb
        Dec 22 2012: The difference between the two is that this debate is on-topic and somewhat constructive, while attacks on Adam Davidson on the Talk page are not. We're happy to see vigorous debate and differing opinions, but Talk comments are meant to focus on the ideas presented in the Talk, not rants about the speaker's personal background.
  • Dec 24 2012: I think there is an agenda in any large entity. Sometimes I think this was created so that people could moniter what the smart people (or peole who fancy themselves as smart) are chatting about. I like Collen's idea of taking it with a grain of salt. people who enjoy TED are people who figure things out for themselves.
  • Dec 23 2012: Certain special interest propaganda is ever present. Why not on ted? Does a fish understand the concept of water? Advertising is always part of our frames. Misdirection is the basis of magic. Academics create straw-men in their debates. Some thoughts become unfashionable even if true. Criticizing a particular person could be deleted even if true because how would a thire party know the truth.
  • thumb
    Dec 23 2012: The conversation area is a Coffee lounge, jump in kick around and nice to have met you and hope to see you again sometime. It's not exactly meant to be politically correct towards one or the other school of thought and well, it is American and runs under something they call non profits.

    I don't see what is wrong with a bit of corporate pie being thrown into the mix? How else are they going to pay the bills, it's not a government service that you pay for with your taxes? They did warn us that they would be more involved with this area.

    Every forum type system has it's regulars, we must be coral nomads, we drift along until we think this seems to be a nice spot to roost until it's time to move on but it doesn't grow around you to what you ideally want.

    You're not the only person to be faced with the deletion and censor notice.

    So the cliff is another excuse for more printing or the signature at the bottom of the contract?
  • thumb
    Dec 22 2012: Obviously in a site that supports different ideas and good ideas will come with bad, the purpose of Ted is to show a full spectrum of opinions and ideas. It does not matter if a person’s opinion could also be propaganda or their opinions are negative. In the end it is up to the person to find what they like.
  • thumb
    Dec 22 2012: Sorry, Bob, who is "Adam"? Is he someone who is important at TED?
  • thumb
    Dec 21 2012: Hi, Bob. I think when any of us reads or hears things, it's smart to evaluate the information to determine whether the speaker/writer makes assumptions we don't think are valid or fails to consider information we think is important.

    Molly Crockett expresses this succinctly in her talk posted this week about what she calls "neuro-bunk," the way advertising/reporting often misrepresent or misuse brain research. She says "ask for the part of the story that is not being told."

    I think that practice is a normal and important part of critical thinking, listening, and reading.

    I also think that talk is one example that makes me question your claim that "anything that opposes the deeply fundamentalist free market beliefs of TEDS backers tends to get deleted." Have you noticed all the threads that challenge free market thinking, money-based economies, and so forth?
    • Dec 21 2012: Yes but TED has schizophrenic record on the subject or I wouldn't be posting this. There is nothing FALSE about his inconsistency and that he has poor track record of being a "journalist" and this is well documented.

      While they post things like that, they certainly seem inconsistent about what it is they are trying to do with TED.
  • thumb
    Dec 21 2012: you are literate? what is your education?
    • Dec 21 2012: Truth and critical thinking are all that are required. Most modern education in america is propaganda and is compromised by corporate money. This is especially seen in economics and philosophies promoted by rich billionaires like libertarianism. Strong ideological feelings that re-enforce the status quo is a sign of lack of of respect for the worlds complexity.

      Credentialism has little bearing on what is true or not.

      Are you disputing adam is not compromised? Stay on topic.
      • thumb
        Dec 21 2012: so you say you don't need any education or knowledge to know what is right?
        • Dec 21 2012: Education is a nebulous word, what one considers education is not an easy question. I have a respect for complicated questions.

          Do you have a respect for the fact that the enlightenment was wrong about human reasoning? And because of what science has discovered about how we reason that means all traditional ideologies are riddled with significant errors not in tune with how reality really works.

          http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PYmi0DLzBdQ

          I really don't like ideological reasoning, I like analysis and perspective but getting at sound methodology is often difficult and you usually can't get it in a very casual forum like ted.
      • thumb
        Dec 21 2012: i didn't say university education. tell me anything you've got. in order to form an opinion, especially about such a complex subject as economics, one needs a great deal of information and explanation. 7 billion independent agents interacting. it is as complex as a large biosystem. you would not go on, and start claiming all sort of stuff about biology, would you? i hope not.
        • thumb
          Dec 22 2012: That's right, we have seen those educated experts in this vast and extra complex economy doing great jobs in creating and foreseeing their bubbles. All worth any penny their parents spend on elite universities to get those smart people out into this world ... ;o) In biology some of those would probably be identifies as cancer. But because I have neither studied economy nor biology I am probably not allowed in your world view to make up my mind and to see what is happening and to use my common sense to understand, why what we see does not make any sense in to many fields of economics ...

          Sometimes to many books about worshiping the 'golden calf' makes ones mind closed to see which parts are already rotten ...

          Economy is no exact science, and you would do better to compare it with religion rather than biology, unless you hate biologists and wish to lower their discipline on purpose ... :o)
  • thumb
    Dec 21 2012: Yeah we know. So by virtue of this knowledge are we supposed to do something? Nothing free ever is.

    If you want to play on the playground, you have to follow the rules of the owner. It's the American way.
    • Dec 21 2012: Censorship doesn't seem very in tune with freedom of speech.
      • thumb
        Dec 21 2012: It's a private non-profit. And if you know your private non-profits, they do not have to hold to freedom of speech. In fact, it's the opposite. They hold to rules and regulations that are allowed if you want to participate. Even boy scouts know this.

        Play by the rules or get off the forum.

        None of us here are stupid or naive. We all understand that in order to have a heated discourse, some type of monitoring is necessary or it all degrades into MySpace where hormonally driven rants are common. Even on TV debates are monitored I appreciate the attempt at keeping the wackadoodle to a minimum.

        TED stands for technology, entertainment and design. Not business, economics, politics, or even science but a lot of those discussion are encouraged. We all know the fiscal cliff is a bunch of BS and the corporate world has been set up to advantage just a few. I don't know Adam any more than I know Steve Jobs so his reputation is meaningless. So I am still confused as to why you think that information is important.