TED (conference)

===TED Talk content===
Disagreements have also occurred between TED speakers and organizers. In her 2010 TED Talk, comedian [[Sarah Silverman]] referred to adopting a "retarded" child. TED organizer [[Chris Anderson (entrepreneur)|Chris Anderson]] objected via his [[Twitter]] account, leading to a conflict between them conducted over Twitter.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://techcrunch.com/2010/02/14/ted-organizer-trashes-speaker-fails-social-iq-test/|title=TED Organizer Trashes Speaker, Fails Social IQ Test|publisher=AOL|work=TechCrunch|date=February 14, 2010 |access-date=February 12, 2015}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=https://techcrunch.com/2010/02/15/the-ted-v-sarah-silverman-fight-turns-really-retarded/|title=The TED v. Sarah Silverman Fight Turns Really Retarded|publisher=AOL|work=TechCrunch|date=February 15, 2010 |access-date=February 12, 2015}}</ref>

Also in 2010, statistician [[Nassim Taleb]] called TED a "monstrosity that turns scientists and thinkers into low-level entertainers, like circus performers". He claimed TED curators did not initially post his talk "warning about the financial crisis" on their site on purely cosmetic grounds.<ref>{{cite book|last=Taleb|first=Nassim N.|year=2010|title=The Black Swan: Second Edition: The Impact of the Highly Improbable: With a New Section: 'On Robustness and Fragility'|oclc=554820308|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=Wu1MJmle10YC|archive-date=September 5, 2013|url-access=limited|publisher=Random House Publishing Group|archive-url=https://archive.org/details/blackswanimpacth00tale_767/page/n367|page=336|isbn=9780812973815}}</ref>

In May 2012, venture capitalist [[Nick Hanauer]] spoke at [[TED University]], challenging the belief that top income earners in America were the engines of job creation. TED attracted controversy when it chose not to post Hanauer's talk on their website. His talk analysed the top rate of tax versus unemployment and economic equality.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2012/05/here-is-the-full-inequality-speech-and-slideshow-that-was-too-hot-for-ted/257323/|title=Here Is the Full Inequality Speech and Slideshow That Was Too Hot for TED|author=National Journal|date=May 17, 2012|work=The Atlantic|access-date=February 12, 2015}}</ref> TED was accused of censoring the talk by not posting it.<ref name=IBT>{{cite web|url=http://www.ibtimes.com/articles/342291/20120517/ted-censors-nick-hanauer-talk-income-inequality.htm|title=TED Censors Seattle Multimillionaire Nick Hanauer's Talk On Income Inequality, Taxing The Rich|date=May 17, 2012|work=International Business Times|access-date=February 12, 2015}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.nationaljournal.com/features/restoration-calls/too-hot-for-ted-income-inequality-20120516|title=Too Hot for TED: Income Inequality|work=nationaljournal.com|access-date=February 12, 2015|archiveurl=http://web.archive.org/web/20120520080005/https://www.nationaljournal.com/features/restoration-calls/too-hot-for-ted-income-inequality-20120516/|archivedate=May 20, 2012}}</ref>

On May 7, 2012, TED curator Chris Anderson, in an email to Hanauer, commented on his decision and took issue with several of Hanauer's assertions in the talk, including the idea that businesspeople were not job creators. He also made clear his aversion to the talk's "political nature":<ref name="email"/>
{{blockquote|text=I agree with your language about ecosystems, and your dismissal of some of the mechanistic economy orthodoxy, yet many of your own statements seem to go further than those arguments justify.<br>But even if the talk was rated a home run, we couldn't release it, because it would be unquestionably regarded as out and out political. We're in the middle of an election year in the US. Your argument comes down firmly on the side of one party. And you even reference that at the start of the talk. TED is nonpartisan and is fighting a constant battle with TEDx organizers to respect that principle...<br>Nick, I personally share your disgust at the growth in inequality in the US, and would love to have found a way to give people a clearer mindset on the issue, without stoking a tedious partisan rehash of all the arguments we hear every day in the mainstream media.<br>Alas, my judgement is that publishing your talk would not meet that goal.|sign=[[Chris Anderson (entrepreneur)|Chris Anderson]], May 7, 2012<ref name="email">{{cite web|last=Tankersley|first=Jim|title=Too Hot for TED: Income Equality|date=May 2012|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150709061031/https://www.nationaljournal.com/features/restoration-calls/too-hot-for-ted-income-inequality-20120516/|archive-date=July 9, 2015|url=http://nationaljournal.com/features/restoration-calls/too-hot-for-ted-income-inequality-20120516|work=[[National Journal]]|access-date=May 16, 2012}}</ref>}} The ''[[National Journal]]'' reported that Anderson considered Hanauer's talk one of the most politically controversial they had produced, and they needed to be careful about when they posted it.<ref name=IBT/> Anderson responded on his personal blog that TED posted only one talk each day, selected from many.<ref>{{cite web|date=May 17, 2012|url=http://tedchris.posterous.com/131417405|title=TEDChris: The untweetable|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130430135514/http://tedchris.posterous.com/131417405|archive-date=April 30, 2013|website=tedchris.posterous.com|access-date=June 18, 2016}}</ref> ''[[Forbes]]'' staff writer Bruce Upbin noted that Hanauer's claim of a relationship between tax rates and unemployment was based entirely on falsified unemployment data,<ref>{{Cite magazine|date=May 17, 2012|last=Upbin |first=Bruce |title=The Real Reason That TED Talk Was 'Censored'? It's Shoddy And Dumb |url=https://www.forbes.com/sites/bruceupbin/2012/05/17/the-real-reason-that-ted-talk-was-censored-its-shoddy-and-dumb/|access-date=June 21, 2012|magazine=[[Forbes]]}}</ref> while ''[[New York (magazine)|New York]]'' magazine condemned TED's move.<ref>{{cite news|url=http://nymag.com/arts/all/approvalmatrix/approval-matrix-2012-5-28/|title=The Approval Matrix|date=May 28, 2012|publisher=New York magazine}}</ref>

Following a TEDx talk by parapsychologist [[Rupert Sheldrake]], TED issued a statement saying their scientific advisors believed that "there is little evidence for some of Sheldrake's more radical claims", and recommended that it "should not be distributed without being framed with caution". The video was moved from the TEDx YouTube channel to the TED blog, accompanied by such framing language. This prompted accusations of censorship, which TED rebutted by pointing out that Sheldrake's talk was still on their website.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://blog.ted.com/2013/03/19/the-debate-about-rupert-sheldrakes-talk/ |title=The debate about Rupert Sheldrake's talk |publisher=TED |date=March 19, 2013}}</ref><ref>{{cite news |author=Bignell, Paul |newspaper=The Independent |url=https://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/gadgets-and-tech/news/ted-conference-censorship-row-8563105.html |archive-url=https://ghostarchive.org/archive/20220526/https://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/gadgets-and-tech/news/ted-conference-censorship-row-8563105.html |archive-date=May 26, 2022 |url-access=subscription |url-status=live |title=TED conference censorship row  |date=April 7, 2013}}</ref> A 2013 talk by [[Graham Hancock]], promoting the use of the drug [[N,N-Dimethyltryptamine|DMT]], was treated the same way.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://blog.ted.com/the-debate-about-graham-hancocks-talk/|title=The debate about Graham Hancock's talk|date=March 19, 2013|website=TED Blog|access-date=March 18, 2019}}</ref><ref name="a fresh take"/>

According to professor [[Benjamin H. Bratton|Benjamin Bratton]] at [[University of California, San Diego]], TED Talks' efforts at fostering progress in [[socio-economics]], science, philosophy and technology have been ineffective.<ref>{{Cite news|date=December 30, 2013 |title=We need to talk about TED|first=Benjamin|last=Bratton|url=http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/dec/30/we-need-to-talk-about-ted |access-date=January 2, 2014 |website=The Guardian }}</ref> Chris Anderson responded that some critics misunderstood TED's goals, failing to recognise that it aimed to instill excitement in audiences in the same ways speakers felt it. He said that TED wished only to bring awareness of significant topics to larger audiences.<ref>{{Cite web|date=January 8, 2014|title=TED is not a recipe for 'civilisational disaster' {{!}} TED Blog |url=https://blog.ted.com/ted-not-a-recipe-for-civilisational-disaster/ |access-date=November 28, 2021}}</ref>