TED Conversations

  • TED
  • New York, NY
  • United States


This conversation is closed.

The debate about Graham Hancock's talk

Please use this space to comment on the debate around Graham Hancock's TEDx talk, as described here:



Closing Statement from TED

Thanks to all who participated in this conversation on TED's decision to move Graham Hancock's talk from YouTube to TED.com. It was scheduled as a 2-week conversation, and has now closed. But the archive will remain visible here.

We'd like to respond here to some of the questions raised in the course of the discussion.

Some asked whether this was "censorship." Now, it's pretty clear that it isn't censorship, since the talk itself is literally a click away on this very site, and easily findable on Google. But it raises an interesting question about curation. Should TED play *any* curatorial role in the content it allows its TEDx organizers to promote? We believe we should. And once you accept a role for curatorial limits, you have to accept there will be times when disputes arise.

A number of questions were raised about TED's science board: How it works and why the member list isn't public. Our science board has 5 members -- all working scientists or distinguished science journalists. When we encounter a scientific talk that raises questions, they advise us on their position. I and my team here at TED make the final decisions. We keep the names of the science board private. This is a common practice for science review boards in the academic world, which preserves the objectivity of the recommendations and also protects the participants from retribution or harassment.

Finally, let me say that TED is 100% committed to open enquiry, including challenges to orthodox thinking. But we're also firm believers in appropriate skepticism, or critical thinking. Those two instincts will sometimes conflict, as they did in this case. That's why we invited this debate. The process hasn't been perfect. But it has been undertaken in passionate pursuit of these core values.

The talk, and this conversation, will remain here, and all are invited to make their own reasoned judgement.

Thanks for listening.

Chris Anderson, TED Curator

Showing single comment thread. View the full conversation.

  • thumb
    Mar 21 2013: Consciousness - the final frontier. We cannot be stopped. Too many around the globe are exploring it - whether with or without drugs. We are evolving as a species. The die has been cast. TED cannot stop it. It can try to stymie it, as it has done, but TED is hurt as its reputation for excellence is lost.

    There is much to criticize TED for: Its anti-intellectualism, its anti-science, its dishonesty, its self-aggrandized hypocrisy, and more. But when this thread expires in 12 days, what will YOU do about it?

    There are many in this forum who are familiar with both consciousness exploration and the new sciences that are exploring consciousness, thanks to amazing insights received from quantum mechanics.

    Let us flood this site with a new kind of conversation - one that brings what we know to those who cannot afford to attend a TED conference, and who we now know will not be able to find a relevant video at TEDs site.

    It's all in the questions, isn't it? Words are powerful things. We are not powerless because we have words, no matter what TED has decided to make itself into. Let us not be victims. Let US do what is right.
    • Mar 25 2013: You know nothing of evolution. The suppression of nonsense is not "anti-intellectualism".

Showing single comment thread. View the full conversation.