Based on all the TED Talks you’ve watched and/or analyzed, what was the least inspiring or least interesting?
- Give the name of the speaker and title of the talk.
- Give the actual link to the TED video page of that talk.
- Explain in 5+ sentences why this video was not inspiring or interesting to you.
- Explain in 3+ more sentences why someone else should not watch this talk.
Leave your response as a comment and hit ‘publish’.
The TEDxClassroomProject 
C.K. Williams reads poetry of youth and age
I was disappointed by this talk. I was expecting something so much more inspiring about poetry. I had hoped he would give a good example of poetry from youths and age. He did not. The poetry was mostly flat and lifeless; nothing flat or lifeless can be inspiring. It was almost like he didn’t even care about making the poetry come across as inspiring. It lacked any passion or care. The poetry chosen did not give a good example of poetry of youth or age, specifically of youth. Now when I hear ‘poetry of youth’ I won’t be able to take it seriously. I will base my opinion of it on my first impression, which due to this talk is that young people’s poetry is pointless expressions without any worth or meaning.
I would not recommend this talk because I wouldn’t want other people’s opinions of young people’s poetry to be ruined by this poor representation. I would prefer for people to be able to form their opinions of poetry off good examples and poetry with substance. It could destroy someone’s appreciation of poetry before they were fairly exposed to good poetry.
Out of the TED talks that I watched, the one that did not interest me was named: What hallucinations reveal about our mind, presented by Oliver Sacks. https://tedxproject.wordpress.com/2010/04/29/oliver-sacks-what-hallucination-reveals-about-our-minds/
I think the reason his talk did not inspire me was because he did not leave me thinking about anything. Honestly, I forgot I even analyzed this talk. Although, I think telling a story is one of the main ways is to inspire your audience, which he did, the story he told did not interest me at all. I learned a few facts about hallucinations from his talk, but that was it. Even though sitting in a chair while giving a talk may seem like a minor detail, it made a huge difference. I think if he was just standing and even walking around a little, the talk itself could have been much better. One of the biggest details that left me not inspired or interested was that he did not leave the audience with a question, allowing them to easily forget about the talk.
I would advise other people not to watch this talk because I think its 20 minutes out of your life, wasted. Unless you are really into hallucinations, then go for it, but if you want to be inspired and interested by the talk, don’t watch it. I don’t really think he had an ‘idea worth spreading’ but rather facts about hallucinations. I have seen much better talks and with a little work and minor adjustments, Oliver Sack’s talk could have been much better.
Aimee Mullins – 12 Pairs of Legs
If I had to pick one talk that inspired me the least, it would be Aimee Mullins’ talk on her twelve pairs of legs. Unlike the first two talks that I analyzed that were by her, this one was less about overcoming the odds and more about fashion and crazy designer legs. Honestly, that subject does not interest me at all. I am much more inspired by sports and inspirational stories than I am about anything that has to do with the fashion business. Prosthetic legs that look like jelly fish are just not up my alley. It wasn’t like this was a horrible talk or had no relevance to anything in the world, I was just not inspired.
I wouldn’t recommend this talk to anyone unless they are highly interested in the fashion industry and its potential future. Like I said before, a hardcore sports guy like me generally doesn’t find anything to do with fashion interesting or inspiring. That being said, there are some people out there that are really interested in this topic and I would recommend it to them. We all are different. One thing that appeals to one person does not appeal to the other.
The TED talk by James Forbes called Compassion At the Dinner Table, http://www.ted.com/talks/james_forbes.html, did not inspire me. I thought that this video would be an easy video to watch because it was about something that I really care about. However, Forbes just ended up telling boring stories from his childhood. The stories he told were off topic and did not lead you anywhere. He never explained what he learned from being compassionate and why it was important to him. I felt disappointed because compassion is something that our society needs more of and his message was not well delivered. When the talk was over I did not have many considerable things to say about it.
This video did not do much for me in the way of inspiration. I think that this video had potential of being great, but it was not really there. I would not recommend this video to anyone because I don’t think anyone could really benefit from it. Forbes was a compassionate person, but his video does not leave you with anything to think about.
Peter Diamandis
Stephen Hawking in zero g
Emotion stories are everywhere… you can see a puppy walking down the street by itself, and it’s enough to invoke an “awwww…” . What good writers can do though (or in this case good speakers) is use these sad stories to make a point. So when a man like Peter Diamandis tells a story that is suppose to be emotional, and doesn’t go anywhere with it, the story looses any sort of edge that it might of otherwise had. He did not talk about the physics behind his “zero Gravity airplane”, and he didn’t go onto say that, “We should take this experience to heart and everyone should have the chance to fulfill their dreams”. While giving Stephen Hawking a chance to be weightless, while it has a sort of irony, it does not serve for any actually informative Ted Talks.
Really, if your looking for a quick smile, and a feel good about the world sort of feeling, then by all means watch this video. If you were looking for something that explains or informs, I’m afraid you’ll be sorely disappointed. Over all this video wasn’t bad, It just seemed sort of pointless.
Natasha Tsakos- Multimedia theatrical adventure
Out of all the talks I analyzed this one was the least inspiring to me and probably to others. I was interested in the different ways acting can be portrayed and how technology can play a different role in the theatre. Although her talk overall is part advertising her show and the other half about technology. If Natasha perhaps talked more about how she came up with the idea of having technology being her partner on stage instead of showing clips and performing scenes from her show would have interested people more. I applaud her passion and love for the theatre but out of all the talks I analyzed this one was had the least impact on me.
Unless one loves the theatre or likes the idea of multimedia be part of the scenery of the show I do not think this talk would be for you. The talk does not reach out to a wide percentage of people so it would only interest the minority of the audience. The talk also does not explain how the audience can help her cause or support the arts. I see it as a promo for her show, so this is why I would not recommend this talk to someone else.
Nicholas Negroponte, in 1984, makes 5 predictions
I didn’t walk away with a new idea, or was I entertained after watching Negroponte’s Talk. There was simply nothing new to take from it. As I mentioned in my blog over the Talk, “the year 1984 has come and gone.” Although I was impressed by the accuracy of his predictions, I didn’t learn anything from them. I simply heard, in my opinion, one guy tell us what will happen in the future. Perhaps at the time the speaker made his predictions, it was a remarkable idea, but his thoughts “back then” don’t really matter “now.” Aside from the irrelevance of his speech to our current lives, Negroponte spoke, again in my opinion, in a very monotone and unexcited Talk that carried on for too long. Though, I may say, the people of TED did a nice job posting this video on their site right as Negroponte’s predictions began coming true.
I would recommend one not to watch this Talk because of it’s irrelevance. I didn’t gain any new ideas from this Talk, and only heard what I already knew. Also, the speaker is, if I may say bluntly, very boring. The Talk is too long, and uninteresting. Now, maybe for a techie this video would be incredible, or “uber-cool.”
John Maeda on the simple life: http://www.ted.com/talks/lang/eng/john_maeda_on_the_simple_life.html
What bothered me about this talk is that it was supposed to be inspiring. To be blunt it just wasn’t. I couldn’t find the main topic and it seemed like he talked more about random stuff than the actual topic of the video. After watching this I still have no idea how to make my life simpler. This man is a good speaker and can keep the audience entertained but the topic stayed flat.
I don’t recommend watching this video unless you’re hunting for a comic. The man is funny but the subject was shunned. I feel like John could be a better speaker if he focused more on his topic not stuff like his cute little cheese puff art. About all this video is good for is arts and crafts.
Sean Carroll on the arrow of time (Part 1 & 2)
Part 1: http://www.ted.com/talks/lang/eng/sean_carroll_on_the_arrow_of_time.html
Part 2: http://www.ted.com/talks/lang/eng/sean_carroll_on_the_arrow_of_time_part_2.html
To be honest, I really TRIED to listen to his talk, through its entirety. I mean, when a you’re stuck with 2 videos that are about 25+ minutes long, you know that your 16-year-old mind will start to kick in. About half way through, maybe not even that, maybe more like a third of the way through both of his videos, I, litearlly, started nodding and dozing off into a nice nap. Only to be waken up suddenly by reminding myself that I had to finish these videos to get a grade. Unfortunately, to this day, I still haven’t seen both of the videos entirely. Which thus making my point: these two were the LEAST inspiring to me out of every video I’ve watched. Bill Gates, over innovating zero energy, was more inspiring and interesting than his. And Bill Gates wasn’t THAT exciting either.
Now, I’m not here critizing, nor bashing, what Sean believes in or his works. Actually, I find them quite fascinating. The only problem is I just found his speech boring. Just from trying to listen to him has made me even wonder how well I’ll survive in college when I will have to attend this lectures.
I wouldn’t necessarily NOT suggest this to anybody. Because, really, his topic is quite interesting if anyone is interested in astrology and cosmology. But, unlike me, I’m not into those sciences all that much which made it less interesting, and inspiring. Plus, the setting is in like a college auditorium, which is very bland in the first place, and his speech is like a professor, at a university, giving his lecture. In my opinon, it’s a little dry.
Sirena Huang: Dazzles on violin
Dazzles on violin was very boring to me and did not inspire me to do anything or even to continue watching the video.
Sirena herself is a very sweet young girl who seems more than comfortable on stage but the video was just a showcase of her violin skills. The music was beautiful but takes up most of the video. It was twenty minutes of a sweet eleven year old girl showing off her skills on the violin. It would be a great YouTube video but did not feel appropriate for being at the TED conference. I do enjoy music very much as well as classical music, but I did not feel the video to be inspiring.
I do not suggest this video because it does not have a true meaningful purpose such as many of the other videos do. I’m not saying this is a video that should never be watched, but compared to the countless other videos on TED it does not stand out. If looking for inspiration or for a more passionate speaker, do not watch this video. You will hear beautiful music and meet a quirky young girl, but other than that there is not much inspiration to be found.
Capt. Charles Moore http://www.ted.com/talks/lang/eng/capt_charles_moore_on_the_seas_of_plastic.html
While I hold an interest in the environment and keeping it safe, Capt. Moore’s talk did little more for me than give me some statistics and a guilt trip. I didn’t really feel interested in what he was saying, even though I knew it was a topic that I really enjoy hearing about. And now that I go back and just read the transcript of the talk, I find that I’m not as non-pulsed by it. So what’s going on here? I’m of the opinion that it was his stage presence that killed the talk for me, because everything else says that I should have been fascinated by it. The tone of voice he uses, for one, was hard for me to listen to. I’m not sure if that’s just me, but I was having trouble keeping my ears focused on what he was saying. I don’t mean this as any insult to Capt. Moore; I actually did enjoy his topic. But I just wasn’t inspired to get up and do anything about plastic bottle waste at the end of his talk.
Stewart Brand: Long Now
I would say that this is my least inspiring talk because he did not really talk about architecture.
The idea behind Long Now was to create a large-scale “time capsule” of sorts to bookmark us for the future. All the video talked about was where they need to build that building and how they are going to manage it. There was not much talk about architecture, which was why I had originally ‘signed’ up for that talk. I could not also identify myself with the project because it did not affect me too much. The topic was not boring, but rather, it was not influential to architecture.
Now, I think that not many people should watch this video because it is quite long and the information is not pertinent to anything that people might be doing. In this essence, I think that people should be cautious when deciding whether or not to choose to watch this video. The topic was interesting, but I would have rather seen more focus on the topic itself, than just the location and process of building the Long Now Tower.
Nellie McKay- “Sings the Dog Song”
This video was disappointing to me because I didn’t feel like the song really had a message and questioned why it was on TED. Nellie McKay has a really nice voice, but the song did not seem like it has substance in it. I also watched her other song about feminism and I thought that song was really good. “The Dog Song” just seems a little out of place on the TED site with all the other videos. This song just seemed like it was a personal song and she was trying to console a friend who had just lost her pet. In her other video Nellie was trying to give her opinion about feminism, but in this song she was just singing a song that she made. Unless you would just like to listen to a pretty voice, I would not recommend watching this video. It seemed to not have a point for a three minute song. Also she seemed to just repeat the chorus over and over again, which after watching it a couple of times to figure out something to right about it, got very annoying. Also if you do not like songs stuck in your head for a long period of time I would not recommend watching this video. The song seemed to get stuck in my head for days at a time.
Christopher Deam restyles the airstream
The reason I chose this for my least inspiring talk was because it didn’t catch my attention. This topic isn’t something I’m really into so it was hard for me to follow and stay interested in during the talk. The ones I was most interested in were talks that I could relate too. When watching this, nothing in particular caught my eye and gave me a good reaction. I think many of my classmates could agree with me if they watched this video as well. This might just because I’m a girl and I’m not into Airstreams or anything in that category. Now don’t get me wrong, it wasn’t an awful talk just the least inspiring of the talks I did write about. I don’t think anyone should really watch the video unless it’s something you’re very interested in. It’s very hard to follow if you have no clue what he was talking about. So if you’re looking for a good TED talk to watch, consider this one of the last ones you choose from.
David Pogue says “Simplicity Sells”
When I found out I had to write this response, this was the first video that came to mind. I don’t want to say i just hated it, because I didn’t. Mr. Pogue did pose some interesting scenarios when visualizing the future of computer design, but his execution of this talk was less than satisfactory. He started off with a goofy song to get the crowd comfortable and in a good mood from the get go. This was a good choice, but through out the remainder of the talk he threw in more and more songs and I began to despise every moment he walked towards the piano. He then started to make fun of (in a joking manner of course) Bill Gates and Microsoft in his talk, and in song form. Though Apple supporters/Mac users around the world probably found this funny, he should have anticipated that some of his audience enjoy using Microsoft. By criticizing and ridiculing Microsoft he may have offended some of his audience, including me. His use of theatrics and props were well used at some points but everything is good in moderation. As the talk wore on I think it became more focused on his jokes, songs, and props than the actual talk.
What I would have wanted to see were practical but innovative examples of technology design and how simplicity is advantageous, but since it came from a biased speaker, it was lacking those things. This is why I think others should not watch this. It didn’t really fit into the category of “TED talk” for me. It didn’t inspire anything in me. It would have been great at an Apple convention, but with a venue such as TED you need to be more aware of how your talk will come across to a wide spectrum of people.
Al Seckel says, “Our brains are miswired”
When I first picked all of my videos, I had a feeling this would be my favorite. I picked my original ten videos by simply reading a short summary of each. Little did I know that a video can sound very interesting and then make you very angry in the end. Not to say that it wasn’t entertaining for a few minutes, then I realized it was pointless. Yes, we all know what optical illusions are. Yes, they work on the human mind. Anyone can show a few pictures to boggle some minds.
I’d advise not to watch this video because in the end, you might feel frustrated. How can someone show some pictures and get all this attention? Al Seckel, a neuroscientist, can do much better! As a neuroscientist, I am sure he can find something more life changing or interesting than a bunch of optical illusions.
Keith Bellows: On the camel’s hump
I feel the need to be honest and say that I wasn’t disappointed by this talk at all, in fact, I expected it to be as boring as it was. It’s about camels…how interesting can it be? I was kind of hoping that I would at least learn something new, but I didn’t. Anything that I learned from that video, I could have learned from watching Animal Planet. Which, is much more interesting, I might add. Not only was the topic boring, but the speaker was kind of jumpy, like he was worried that every ADD/ADHD kid in the room would have a hard time paying attention if he elaborated even a little bit on one thing. I’m ADHD, and I promise you, it doesn’t matter how quickly you get through it, if we don’t want to pay attention, we’re not going to. Boring topic, poor presentation: I couldn’t help but wonder why he would even bother talking.
I can honestly say that I don’t see myself recommending this video to anyone in the near or distant future. Then again, you never know. I could meet someone who is in serious need of a quick review on camels for their test the next morning. Unless that happens, though, I won’t be recommending this video.
Yves Behar: Designing Objects that Tell Stories
I found Behar’s talk to be very mainstream. It seemed everything he explained could be gathered from common sense, and there was nothing that made it a particularly unique talk. His manner and speech did not not make a deep impression on, in fact I believe it was a little forgettable. There was also a little hint of advertising mixed in with his talk, where in a few part all he does is state that certain products he was involved in are better than others. I do give credit to Behar for attempting to change the way products are seen, but overall there was nothing he said that stood apart from general classes and discussions on design principles.
I would not recommend this talk because for one it did not capture my interest. Out of all of the many talks on Ted, this one did not stand out to me. As a speaker, Behar also contradicts himself at intervals in his speech, which made the overall point he was trying to make not so cohesive.
Amory Lovins: winning the oil endgame: http://www.ted.com/talks/lang/eng/amory_lovins_on_winning_the_oil_endgame.html
Before I watched this video, I have to admit that i was pretty excited about getting the watch this video and bogging about it. When i started to watch it, I got so bored that I couldn’t even finish the video! Because I didn’t like the video I didn’t spend that mush time blogging about it. I think what made it unpleasant to watch was that there was no personality to his TED talk. His speech was mostly facts and it seemed like he was repeating most of what he was talking about. Also his voice was some what monotone. Maybe if this video was shorter it would have been better. I wouldn’t recommend this video to anyone because I think most of the stuff I think people may already know.
Fischell, Robert: Medical inventing
Obviously the dude’s a genius. I respect him and am amazed at what he has done. However, the monotony of the talk and the monotony of the presentation numbed my mind. Not to mention the talk was bordering thirty minutes. All in all, the length of the talk, coupled with the feeling that the man was simply awarding himself prasie, which he deserved!, left me feeling incomplete. With the most remarkable TED talks the person makes me want to be passionate about what they are talking about. With this TED talk, I was taught what the man had done.
Unless you are simply a biomedical fanatic, which I originally believed I was, I would not recommend this video. The lack of images that enhanced what the speaker was saying distracted me from the focus of the talk. Because of its prevalence, I did find the talk interesting and pertinent, but this talk did not make me wish to rise and invent a way to successfully transplant a pigs heart into a man.
Ross Lovegrove shares organic design
I found a clear winner for my least inspiring and informative talks in Ross Lovegrove’s narrative on organic design. I had such high expectations when I picked his video because I love art, especially 3-D art. The concept of incorporating organic materials into creating works of art was very appealing and I had hoped to learn how to use the same medium in my art classes. I was very disappointed to find out that all Mr. Lovegrove was interested in was self-glamorization. He was constantly talking about how original his designs were while in fact he was copying his ideas from nature. I disagreed with him on several issues ranging from his disregard for those who did not share his viewpoints to taking credit for designs that came from his design team.
If anyone wants to see an artist that is totally self-absorbed then he or she should watch Mr. Lovegrove’s talk. They will watch and listen to Mr. Lovegrove bash modern industry for their lack of understanding his vision while comparing himself to the great artist of history Da Vinci. As for me, the entire talk was a tedious and long-winded speech about how great he is and how he is going to change history. Not my idea of an inspiring and motivating talk.
Eric Topol: The Wireless of medicine
I had many good talks so I’m going to go off on a limb here. This talk can be inspirational, but from my point of view it is not inspirational. The reason I don’t like this video is because I don’t think that this is where the future in medicine should be going as you can see by my blog. I want the future in medicine to be curing cancer not detecting it earlier. I don’t want people telling me that we can only monitor your heart for heart failure, I want to know that you can prevent it. I know this sounds highly impossible. The reason I think this talk is not inspiring is because, in my opinion people should be spending more time looking for a cure for cancer.
I think people should still watch this talk because there are technologies out there that you would never know of until you watched this video. This talk is only for you if you are interested in medicine. Most people will find it boring if they don’t have a passion for saving lives. Overall I though his voice was very monotone and boring and that he likes to state facts.
Security and Insecurity by Eve Ensler is a compelling story of how women around the world are being saved. However, when I first heard this talk the topic was unclear to me. The stories of Eve’s personal adventures around the globe and the subject of the talk were conflicting and erratic. I still struggle to pinpoint the exact subject of the talk. Her talk was even less inspiring considering it was aimed at the female population. There is nothing wrong with that, but her speech was not directed towards the male population in any way. Her passion about abused women is evident; however, it seemed that she used the topic of security to rant about the female suffering around the globe. Although I agree with her on the themes and the ideas of her talk, I found the method in which she presented it to be rather boring and uneventful. She sat on the chair and read from her page the entire time. It took a lot of the passion and the enthusiasm of the subject and drained it out of her. It seemed as though she was reading to the paper, not the audience. The ‘inspirational’ factor was low, but when I read the talk on paper using the interactive transcript, the page was teeming with passion and feeling. Therefore, I came to the conclusion that the strength of a speakers talk is not necessarily the information they provide or the topic they speak about, but rather through the method of the presentation and the passion that they portray to the audience.
The talk itself and the information provided in it are good. However, it was not spectacular. Nothing really inspired me. It seemed more like a college lecture that although I agree with the speaker, I could easily fall asleep any minute. I would like to hear the talk again, but from her heart. Hopefully, the passion that is evident when I read the transcript would become more obvious and her intent would become clearer.
If I had to choose a video that was least inspiring to me, it would be Jakob Trollback’s Rethinking the Music Video: http://www.ted.com/talks/lang/eng/jakob_trollback_rethinks_the_music_video.html
I was disappointed with this video, because I love music, so I thought that it would be a fun video to watch and write about. The video is about remaking a music video, with the actual music as the director. I was very confused by this concept but I was curious to see what it would look like. But to be honest, once the music started playing I wanted to turn it off. It was not only the music that I did not enjoy, but I thought the video was very uninteresting because, to me it was just words on a screen. Now of course to many others, I’m sure that the video was really interesting and inspiring, but to me it was not, because I still do not understand how music could really be the director.
I do not recommend this video for anyone to watch, unless you like technology mixed with music about rising waters and religion. I think that Trollback was headed on an interesting path but the execution of the talk and video were not as inspiring as what could have been. Also I did not find any true purpose of the video, compared to many others I watched.
I think the least inspiring ted talk I saw was Nina Javlonski: breaks the illusion of skin color: http://www.ted.com/talks/lang/eng/nina_jablonski_breaks_the_illusion_of_skin_color.html
Honestly it wasn’t all that bad. However out of all the talks I’ve viewed it was definitely the least interesting. I simply don’t place much stock in evolutionism so it’s never interested me. I was less uninspired than ambivalent toward it. While her presentation wasn’t bad she didn’t really offer any new or terribly engaging points.
I wouldn’t recommend this video for two reasons: one, if you are a fanatic creationist, this talk will only irritate you. Or two: if you are a very well versed evolutionist who would likely be bored by this talk. I think it’s a perfectly fine talk for your average viewer, it’s not exceptional but neither is it terrible.
In this non-inspiring TED talk, Steven Pinker plays the role of knowledgeable yet dull and colourless english professor giving a speech to some college freshmen needing an english credit.
For the duration of “Steven Pinker on language and thought,” I was wondering when I will be inspired. The minutes ticked by and his confusing ideas and facts were looming around in my mind with no specific equation or purpose. It was not TED material in the least. The only thing he could be praised for would be that he points out things in speech habits that nobody but first-grade english teachers realize or remember for that matter. Many of his critical points were not executed in a way that helps the audience member understand or learn. For a speaker on the subject of language, he doesn’t utilize it very well. In the end, his ideas point us in a direction but never takes us there, and never market any reason why to go there at all.
The only person who I could think of that would eat up this video is a elementary level teacher. Otherwise this talked was over detailed in the worst places, uninteresting to one who wishes to learn about the connections between language and the brain, and hard to sit through without being distracted. Hopefully Pinker’s other talks were more successful.
Jane Goodall on what separates us from the apes
I found this video to be least inspiring because I was expecting some sort of anti-evolutionist, pro-creationist talk. When I looked at the title I thought that she was going to talk about the differences between humans and apes and how it is improbable that we evolved from them. However the video wasn’t exactly pro-evolutionism or pro-creationism. It was mainly about how we consciously think different than apes, which got a bit boring after twenty minutes. Compared to the other TED talks that I have watched, Jane’s video just wasn’t interesting to me. Maybe it was because she was monotone and stood at the podium during the entire talk. I always find talks where the speaker is constantly moving around and sounds passionate about what they are talking about to be more interesting. I think the issue of using technology to better understand the behavior of animals is important, but the talk just wasn’t inspiring or interesting to me.
I would not advise this talk to anyone that is like me and is expecting some type a creationist ideas. I also would not recommend this talk because the title is misleading. For a large portion of the video she is talking about the new technology and advancements being used in these villages and with the apes. To me, this talk was hard to focus on. I felt like she could have got her main idea across in a much shorter time.
Norman Foster’s Green Agenda.
The overall idea that Foster was getting at was something that isn’t very out there or different. It’s the same thing that we as a society have heard for a long time, and now we’re finally listening to it. I feel like his point is a good one, basically saying how we need to be more environmentally conscious and how it can actually help our society. However, I feel like his delivery of his speech wasn’t at the best I think. I think what he saying was wonderful, but the way he said his speech was in a very mono-tone, and monotonous way. I think that overall the subject itself isn’t inspiring either. I think that overall the subject is a great one to be dicussef, but it’s so common that nowadays you hear it being talked about constantly. I’m all for going green, but the way Foster speaks his ideas to the audience and the rest of the web isn’t inspiring.
While Liz Coleman’s talk does point out that we need to restructure our education, I think she could have approached the subject differently. While I’m sure we all agree that Russia should be educated, it had little to do with the point of her talk, other than that the Russians wanted a new education system. The main point of her talk, though, is what is wrong with colleges and schools today. Coleman pointed out that, when being educated today, most people only learn, or are only given the chance to learn, just what they need to know to get by. Also, Coleman, I think, could have made her talk a bit more interesting. I’m sure that correcting our education system is important, but I’m not exactly a fan of politics and that is how her talk started out, with politics.
I wouldn’t suggest this video because of the lack in enthusiasm Coleman shows while discussing her topic. I was expecting a talk about some way to make learning more enjoyable or even about how teachers were lacking in their jobs, but it turned out to be a rather dull talk about the way education has changed and the field of learning has been narrowed.
Ray Kurzweil: how technology will transform us
Of all of the TED talks that I watched, I would have to say that the least inspiring was Ray Kurzweil’s. The title of his video gives the impression that he will be speaking entirely of technology and how it will impact people, but in all honesty he does not even get to technology until about the last third of the talk. For the majority of the talk, he talks about exponential growth, and although he does relate it to technology, he doesn’t relate it to us, personally, for a very long time, and therefore it was entirely too easy to find myself distracted and I had a very difficult time focusing on the talk. Quite honestly, for the majority of the talk I really did not know what he was trying to say or where he was going, and I believe that made the talk ineffective. Once he did start talking about the possibilities of technology relating to normal people, it got more interesting, but not in a positive way. In reading the comments I found that the vast majority of people who watched and commented on the video shared my reaction to what Kurzweil was saying, which was fear and a smidge of resentment. While any strong reaction can be considered good for a speaker, I truly do not remember any comments that reflected upon Kurzweil’s ideas in a positive manner, and it will be difficult to accomplish anything without supporters. I believe that his lack of supporters may be attributed in part to his delivery of the talk; maybe if the talk was more interesting and easy to follow in the beginning, and he explained in greater detail the benefits of the technology he claimed to be just around the corner instead of leaving it up to audience interpretation, the talk would have been more effective and his claims more respected.
I do not encourage anyone to watch this talk because for the majority of it, they will most likely find themselves bored and wondering what relevance the talk has to anything in their life. Once that relevance is eventually established, however, it is presented in a nearly threatening manner, whether that was the intent or not. Kurzweil, in my opinion, does not do a good job of portraying his ideas in a way that will be appealing to the audience or, more importantly, even respectable. His failure to address the potential grave consequences of the technology that he is helping to create causes him to lose my respect; addressing the good and ignoring the bad seems like a cheap way to cop out and not take responsibility for everything that could happen as a result of his creation.
Deborah Gordon -Digs ants
This video did not inspire me because I thought the speaker was very boring to watch and listen to. But talking about ants doesn’t really help Deborah’s talk either. I watched this video multiple times to try to find something interesting to build off of. I literally used my imagination to write the whole blog. Although I am confident that my blog entry wasn’t lacking of creativity… But the content that was given to me to analyze made it difficult for me to develop ideas because the speaker and her topic were both not interesting.
As you know someone who sounds very boring during public speaking will cause you to become disinterested in what they are talking about and you will start to think about other things. Many people (like myself) would find ants to be one of the last topics that they would want to learn about. Unfortunately this video has all of the above and you should not watch it.
However I will say this… Deborah Gordon did do some legitimate research and I do not doubt that she is smart and she knows what she is talking about.
The video that I found to be the least inspiring was Steven Levitt on Child Carseats. I was initially very interested in the topic because while driving around I always see children without carseats and it worries me. But once I began to watch the video I was extremely bored and not that impressed. Levitt was throwing out data that he found to not be useful and his data didn’t account for injuries, only deaths. In theory it should have been a good talk and that is probably why I was so disappointed. My expectations exceeded the reality. Maybe if Levitt had used his data more efficiently I would have been more apt to buy into the idea, but he didn’t.
Another flaw was that in the beginning of the talk he told a story of a disease and its two cures. This disease turned out to be car crashes and the cures were seat belts and car seats. This whole analogy went on for far too long and didn’t have the impact it should have. Again, it was a good idea, yet poorly executed.
Others should not watch this video because it will not benefit you in any way. It won’t leave you wanting more or wanting to do something to make a difference. I was just indifferent to this video and I feel as if others will be, as well.
Nellie McKay sings “Clonie”
Out of the eight videos I watched, this one was least inspiring. I didn’t get the point of her talk and what she was trying to explain. In my opinion, thought her talk wasn’t serious enough. To me her singing wasn’t funny at all. This video was not inspiring to me; I was looking forward to learn something from it.
I would not recommend this video to anyone, because the video was not interesting. I think this video will waste your time, because the lack of life in it. I like to listen to different kinds of music, but this just destroyed my ears.
Kirk Citron: And now, the real news
Citron asked: What news will matter in the long run? He made it seem that the only news that mattered was the news that will have impact in the long run. But, news in the short run is necessary too. Even bits of news he showed during is talk were important. I understood that that his project, The Long News was just collecting news that would impact the long run, but everyday news affects our daily lives, and he made it seem like everyday news was unimportant.
His project is interesting, but I wouldn’t listen to this talk because all that you may take out of it is that only news that affects the long run is important. If he had only talked about the project this talk would’ve been better. The main problem was the negative vibe he gave to everyday news.
Michael Moschen: Juggles Rhythm and Motion
I was somewhat disappointed with this talk. When I first saw the title I was very interested to see what he would do with rhythm and motion. However, when I watched it all the way through I ended up a tad confused. I ended up with the burning question of, “What was the point?” I could definitely tell he was passionate about juggling (you would have to love it to be able to do what he did). The talk is quite interesting to watch with all of the juggling, but that is pretty much the extent. The talk is mainly performance with him trying to explain how to use positive and negative space. He also tries to explain time at one point. With each explanation, he gives it in chunks. In the end you just end up really confused and lacking 30 minutes you originally had.
If a good juggling act would interest you, so would this video. If you are trying to get anything else out of it, you won’t. There is a clear path he was headed towards, but his lacking presentation and the split explanations made him fall short.
The least inspiring talk was about le vie en rose.
As far as inspiration goes it did not move me. It was entertaining, but not something that I will think back on for long. I know that I may have enjoyed it more if I spoke French. I was amused by it, but certainly not inspired. It was no where near the type of fascinating, inspiring talks I witnessed on other subjects. Most of the other talks were very educational even if I did not know much about the subject before hand.
I would not recommend this to my fellow students. It is silly and does not hold much value. It is short, though, so if someone watched it , it would not take much time.
Becky Blanton
Year I was homeless
This was my least inspiring talk because i just didn’t enjoy it. It’s not something that caught my attention. Being homeless isn’t something I would ever choose but I did like how I could hear how it was. Things I did not enjoy was how she wasn’t wry outgoing. Also when she replied to me she wasn’t very friendly so that disinterested me from everything. This didn’t interest me because I wouldn’t relate to wanting to become homeless.
For me, the least inspiring TED talk is Gary Lauder’s new traffic sign:Take turns.
It is just a list of stats about stop signs and roads. The whole talk could have been summed up with a list of bullet points. While there were a few mildly amusing moments, it was very boring overall. It was very boring. I feel that is is just not up to par considering the other great TED talks. Also, traffic signs are not exactly the most interesting things in the world. Also, there did not seem to be a point, other than saying how great roundabouts are. At least this talk isn’t too long, so you don’t wait too much of your life.
St. John Richard Success is a continuous journey
While this video had a lot of potential I felt like it was very obvious knowledge that we all basically knew already. It was also very short which made it hard to write about. One of the major things that I did not like about it was that I didn’t feel a connection between me, as an audience, with the speaker. I had no Idea who he was and after a background check I was more aware. But to those people who are not willing to go and do a background check, he is just another successful man who through hard work got everything he wanted. So maybe a brief introduction would have been a nice thing to start off with. I feel like the content of the video was very well known to the audience because we all know that we need dedication and passion to be successful of such a high degree. I also believe if Mr. Richard went into more detail of his troubles and really made it so that the audience could connect with him on some level we would feel a closer relationship with the speaker. Throughout all the TED talk on the website I believe some of the other talks do a better job of involving the audience. This is important because this make a closer bond between those who are watching and the presenters.
Erik Hersman: Reporting crisis via texting
Erik Hersman’s talk was good, and it was inspiring, but the reason why I did not just love this talk was because I felt very confused when I was watching. I understand that he did not have much time to talk about this, and this was something he could have obvioulsy spent lots of time talking about. I think the overall idea of what he was saying was great, and it was a great message and a fabulous plan that I think is very important. Although, the way he talked was very fast and it was honestly very hard to follow. I was trying to figure out if something had gone wrong with the plan, or they were trying to prevent anyone from sending in texts that were not important. I think if maybe he had more time to give his talk that it could have been more clear, more relaxed and he would have been able to really explain everything in detail about what he wanted to happen.
I do not reccomend this talk because I think with the title it has you will be disapointed. I felt very excited to watch this because they were incorporating technology with events, but the way he talked made me very confused and even though it was a short talk I did not want to finish it. In the end, it was too complicated and it seemed way to hard to follow.
Elaine Morgan: We evolved from aquatic apes.
I found this talk to be the worst I have watched this whole project. To me, this talk seemed to be unconvincing, confusing, and boring.
I clicked on this video because the title was interesting. I thought it would be interesting to see what other people think, even though I did not agree with it.
I was not impressed by this video at all. I zoned out about two minutes into the video. When I went back to the video, she was talking about fossilized pollen.
What she was saying did not make any sense to me. I strongly value her opinion, but she went about presenting it all wrong.
My least favourite talk would be Seattle’s Library by Joshua Prince-Ramus.
To people who are interested in architecture and the designs of Joshua Prince-Ramus, this is definitely the talk for you. But for me, a tenth grade student interested in criminal investigation and law, this talk just didn’t appeal to me. Being an art student, I did respect his outside of the box thinking about modern designs but I found it difficult for me to write about it. Okay, so you created all these buildings, now what? This video was unappealing to me because I wasn’t interested in the topic. Being an art student I looked at the video in a different light and if you are interested in architecture and design I highly recommend this video. Not everything is going to please everyone on TED so this talk being deemed least favourite has nothing to do with him as a speaker. Joshua Prince-Ramus is a great speaker and he offers great ideas for designers, so if that is what you’re into, make sure to check his talk out. If you are into nothing relating to design at all, I’d say skip it.
“Black Men Ski” Stew:
I’m sad to say, but of all of the TED talks I have seen so far this was the least inspiring and interesting. I do applaud Mr. Stew for choosing to perform such a risky piece, but personally I just don’t feel it fit the theme of TED as a whole. When I’m preparing to watch A TED talk I expect that I will learn something new and by the end will have a new perspective about a particular subject. But the only thing I really got from this video was a chuckle here and there, and the chorus constantly replaying in my head.
Zach Kaplan and Keith Schacht: Demo Toys from the Future
I didn’t find this video to be all that interesting. I think it is mostly because of they’re presentation style. You could tell they were really nervous and at times it seemed a little rehearsed. One of the things I really didn’t get was why they were even invited to do TED. Their products were pretty interesting, but the thing is they didn’t even invent any of them, It was almost like it was show and tell. They should have invited the actual inventors of each product.
As I said before the products were really interesting, but their presentation was not appealing at all. They really should have gotten a the actual inventors themselves to present. Watch this only if you want to gather knowledge and thats it!
The least inspiring to me was called the beautiful math about coral. http://www.ted.com/talks/margaret_wertheim_crochets_the_coral_reef.html
This video was not appealing to me. I am not just that interested in coral. Also they talk about how to crochet the organisms. I am not that big into these kinda things. I love nature and everything about nature but how to recreate it by crocheting is not up my ally. I guess the only reason I was not into the video is because I cant relate to it. Coral is a beautiful organism but trying to understand the geometry involved in recreating pushes me away from it even more. I would not recommend this video.
If you are interested on how to fill a three thousand square foot area with coral crocheting watch the video. The person who is talking doesn’t seem that enthusiastic in the video she mainly talks in one tone which makes the video really boring. The slide show she shows are just pictures of what she had made and it doesn’t catch your eye like others
George Dyson, The Birth of the Computer
This video was difficult to follow because I don’t know that much about the computers mechanics. I can use it just fine, but as far as the details as to how it works I’m not so “in the know”. Dyson didn’t really explain his topic well enough for people like myself to really appreciate and understand what the was trying to get across. It was boring for me, and therefore in no way interesting. In a sense it was a little inspiring, in the way you want to go create something revolutionary but not in the way of recreating the computer.
If you’re into computers and how they really work than this is for you! If not then I advice you skip it. It’s interesting for about two minutes then you get lost in big words and technology and it becomes hard to follow. That’s about when you’ll zone out and stop listening.
Wicker Miurin, Fields
I respected Fields as a courageous female who wanted make the world a better place. Her point was that we as humans should become better leaders. I think she is the first person to ever think of this idea. It astonishes me that TED would allow her on the stage. Her story about “Binkee” was not appealing at all and her voice did not help that the whole presentation was spoken in monotone.
Why shouldn’t you watch this video? Well for one it is a sixteen minute video spoken in monotone about a ridiculous topic. Her presentation overall was not very powerfull and did not appeal to me what so ever. This video was very pointless and insulted my intelligence.
John Doerr; sees salvation and profit in greentech
This talk was hard for me to watch because I was confused about the message the speaker was trying to convey. He kept saying ‘I am scared’ and would then go on about how bad off the earth is, at times I felt like I was watching chicken little.
I did not disagree with with what Mr. Doerr was saying, nor was the talk uninformative, or uninspirational, but the way he delivered it was very exteame. When I was done watching this talk I felt like I had committed some sort of major crime. Perhaps these feeling were the objective of the speaker, I am not sure.
I don’t really think people will want to watch this talk for four reasons. Reason one, when you are presenting a message that people have heard before you have to make it different, special and he did not. Reason two there was no clear purpose to the talk, I was not sure if he was trying to scare me or infom me. Reason three after I had watched it I felt like I could have gone to the internet, done a couple hours of research and given the same talk. Finaly, reason four, he did not connect to the people in the audience the away thata speaker should.
The next 5,000 days of the web
This talk could of been very interesting but ended up being very confusing. At first Kevin Kelly started out by making interesting points about how far the web has come, but then started talking about some machine that the web should work off of and that all technology should work off of. I feel like he didn’t get his point across very well and I really didn’t understand what he was talking about.
I do not think anybody should watch this video because I don’t think he really made his ideas clear about what is going to happen in the next 5,000 days of the web. I think that it could of been more interesting. This video was definately my least favorite.
Loretta Napoleoni: The Intricate Economics of Terrorism
Loretta Napoleoni gave up her company and her life to research the economics of terrorism, although I was not impressed with her talk or her research.
Not many people are interested in economics, yet alone the economics of terrorism.
All she did was trace money to and from terrorists and found out how they are funded, but the research she conducted has little to no effect on the masses.
It was all just a personal journey to find an answer to a question that intrigued her. There was no larger connection to the world or to the audience, as she failed to explain why the audience should care.
Unless you are a guru on economics, I would definitely not recommend this talk. I could hardly understand the terms she was using, what they meant, or why they even applied to me.
There is not really much to gain from this talk, other than how terrorists support themselves financially. If that interest you, then watch this talk, but I doubt that is a topic that interests a lot of people.
The least inspiring TED talk I saw was Garret Lisi’s theory of everything.
It was not very interesting and his monotone voice is just boring to listen to. The entire time he is rambling on about something that has to do with physics. I don’t really know what it was actually. All I saw was little colorful shapes spinning in circles. I truthfully could have fallen asleep if I wanted to. You should not watch this video, unless you plan on taking a good nap. Truthfully it is a mood killer and I would not watch it if I were you. I would actually make a TED talk about not watching this TED talk.
Marc Pachter: The Art of the Interview
If you read my reflection on this talk, you may find that I’m contradicting myself by choosing this talk as the least inspiring. Well, I am.
When I first watched this talk I was bored by it. I found it somewhat difficult to follow and I Pachter’s presentation of it was somewhat unimpressive. In fact, I stopped watching the video and walked away for a few minutes. I came back and decided I would read the transcript. This I enjoyed, and I could follow along better. I analyzed what was said and I liked it very much. So why is it my least inspiring?
Well, I thought about it, and if a talk is going to be inspiring, it has to be inspiring from the beginning. You shouldn’t have to sit down and analyze a talk before you feel inspired. At least, that’s how I feel. I had to think hard about this talk before I felt inspired, and that’s not what TED is meant to be.
I would only recommend this to you if you were an aspiring journalist. Try to watch the talk first, but you may have to switch to the transcript. If you’re like me, I would suggest skipping this one.
My least inspiring TED talk was Gary Lauders: new traffic signs
Basically this talk is how stopping at stop signs costs you money. It’s about how great roundabouts are and how we would save millions of dollars with them. It also talks about a new traffic sign: take turns. I really don’t think that would work because everyone would think it was their turn. It also has a whole lot of rushed math figures that are nearly impossible to keep up with. The only way I could see someone liking this talk if they hated stop signs or were European. It’s just overall boring. It doesn’t really inspire me to do anything.
Charles Elachi, Mars Rover
It was really long and i could not follow what was being said at points in the talk. They used a lot of terms that you would only understand if you are in their line of business. I lost focus after about 10 minutes because it did not grab my attention. It was not very interesting to me and i think the way they setup their talk could have been better. This talk was hard for me to write about just because i did not hardly know what they were talking about.
This talk is incredibly long. It is very boring and you might lose focus very quickly. If you like being entertained, this talk is not for you. However if you are in their field of expertise, then maybe it will be of interest to you.
Stew says “Black Men Ski”
This video is funny and a corky way to get a message across but I am going to put it under my least inspiring. It didn’t really make me personally feel any different has a person and that’s what inspiring is about. I like the message he is trying to say but its just another video I had to write about. I’ll never forget it because it’s very catchy and un forgettable but it didn’t impact my life. It was just a funny song. I’m not going to say not to watch it because if you want a funny little corky video then go ahead, just don’t be in search of something soul touching.
I think the least inspiring Talk that I watched was Eric Giler’s Talk on wireless electricity.
I think my biggest concern with this Talk is that Giler came to inform us about WiTricity and wireless electricity, but he ended up telling us just a little bit about it, and telling us how it could be used. I personally thought that he could have given more information about when we could have it ourselves and the limitations of the technology. To me, it felt like it was one big sales pitch for something that wasn’t even available yet. I also felt that Giler spoke in an uninspired way, and that he didn’t really give the audience a real picture of how good the technology really was. Finally, I was unimpressed with how he demonstrated the technology – perhaps he could have beamed the power from across the room? I don’t think this Talk is worth your time because Giler isn’t that inspiring and doesn’t really make you want to go out and buy this technology. I also think that the Talk is just a big sales pitch. Finally, his slides are ineffective and cheesy.
Olafur Eliasson: Playing w/ Space & Light
This is actually one of only three videos that I chose for myself. I was intrigued by the title, and upon reading the summary was looking forward to “this idea-packed talk (which) begins with an experiment in the nature of perception.” However, once I began watching it I realized that the cool “experiment in the nature of perception”, was just him flashing some colored boxes on a screen to be replaced with a white screen, upon which the complimentary color would appear.
I found this to be a rather disappointing experiment. I had done this in my art and science classes in elementary school. Although, the points he made about why he showed them and how they change the relationship between image and viewer were interesting, so I was only a little frustrated. Then he continues, showing images and videos of artwork that require the viewer to complete the effect of the image, but I thought that was the point of art, so it wasn’t really anything new. Also, I had trouble following the point of the talk, and I couldn’t really connect all of the dots until my third or fourth viewing. Having to put so much effort into understanding what he meant replaced any inspiration I found in his artwork with frustration.
I would not recommend this talk to anyone unless they have the time to watch two or three times. The points and art are interesting, but unfortunately the execution of the presentation does not do them justice. If you are interested in art, I would suggest watching this talk to learn some of his techniques, but other than that I do not strongly recommend this talk. It had some beautiful and intriguing art, but I simply did not feel inspired.
Nick Sears Demos The Orb
In my opinion this to me was my least inspiring video mainly because I felt the speaker didn’t explain what his device’s function was. I had to watch this video a couple times to see if there was more to it than a spinning sphere of lights. Then I realized nope, its just a spinning sphere of lights that display an image. Overall this would be a cool device to have sitting in my room or something, but I don’t think many people would be inspired by it. Although this technology is relatively new and deserves to be shown off I find it giving little to no inspiration to most people.
I wouldn’t recommend this video to most because the device shown seems to have little use and I didn’t find it inspiring. But if you’re interested in the technology behind making an LED orb then I recommend this for you. Otherwise you might find this video a bit boring.
‘
Sasa Vucinic invests in free press
Vucinic had a wonderful topic to talk about: Freedom of Press. However, while I have heard some bad talks, never has one been so boring as this. He spoke monotonously, and slurred together words. Sasa attempted a few jokes to make the audience more attentive, yet the audience did not understand him for another 10 ten seconds after his attempted, and failed, comic relief. I endured watching the video twice more. The first repeat was to grasp the topic and flow of his presentation and the second was to actually understand everything he was saying and attempt to analyze it at the same time.
I would not recommend this talk to be watched at all. It talks about how his company is trying to fund new free press ventures across the world. There is absolutely nothing wrong with this topic. However, the talk is not only boring, it also is not inspirational.
My least favoirte talk was undoubtedly Ray Anderson on the business logic of sustainability. What I didnt like about this talk in particular was not a fault of TED or the speaker, but my own fault. My lack of understanding of economics and business in general is what I attribute my dislike of this video to, as I highly respect what Ray Anderson and his company are managing to do. However, I also found this talk highly statistical, and that took me away from the presentation and into a world of numbers, and it provided a distraction from the speaker. I also dont like how the talk was presented by Ray Anderson himself, but I can respect the initiative he took as an individual. However, I wont slam this video on what it contains, as my dislike and overall opinion on the video is ownly due to my own lack of understanding of the broad subject of economics and business, as my age prohibits me from having as much of a grasp as is necessary to fully understand what is being said. I could happily say that if the individual watching has a firm knowledge of economics and business, they should give the video a whirl, as it provides an insight into what companies can do to become more succesful, and is fairly interesting in its own right.
Robert Wright on optimism
This was the least inspiring ted talk for one simple reason. IT SAID NOTHING. Mr. Wright’s beliefs are too analytical and he makes little to no sense whatsoever. He gives reasons for why people hate America, why business will lead to greater morals, and even tennis. Many of you may be looking for a certain word in there that starts with an “opti” and ends with a “mism”. But, I believe the word was never used once during the entire talk. If so, it was drowned by his ranting about “Non-Zero Sum Games” and other things that made little to no sense.
I suggest that people do not watch this talk for the same simple reason I gave in the first paragraph. IT SAID NOTHING. All Mr. Wright did was rant about any and everything other than optimism and this results in this talk being a waste of your 19 minutes and 14 seconds you will not get back.
David Griffin: Photography That Connects Us
I did not like this TEDtalk because photography isn’t really inspiring to me. I believe that David Griffin tried hard to get his point across, but it was hard to find out what his point really was. He would talk about photography for about ten seconds and then start showing pictures and explaining what was in them. Most of the video is just explaining photographs, talking about photographers, and telling stories. I didn’t even really get the point of this talk.
I don’t really recommend this talk to anyone. Unless you like photography, of course. Or if you want to hear stories. Otherwise, you won’t really learn anything from this talk.
George Whitesides – A Lab the Size of a Postage Stamp.
Where can I start?
I thought this video was bad for a few reasons. First off, the entire thing was basically about an elderly man talking about a new branch off of pregnancy test technology. Oh boy! Please, tell me more! … Yeah, it wasn’t very exciting. I also found it very hard to get into this video as I thought that he wasn’t a very good speaker. They say experience comes with age, I guess just not in his case. I will say that the things that he said we could do with paper for such a low cost was pretty cool. That said, it still doesn’t compare to how bored I was when I was trying to finish my analysis on his video. There was no energy in the talk, and the entire thing didn’t inspire me to do anything except to consider picking another talk that week.
I picked this one as the least inspiring over another video I had that was simply a Malian singer/songwriter performing a song in African.
Could I understand her? No.
Was it still better than this video? All day, every day.
The axiom that a “promise is a promise” is one that I most certainly hold dear to my heart; nevertheless, circumstances have been known to get the best of me, and even what I have sweared from the bottom of my soul can fade away with the blink of an eye.
Of course, I’m referring to my self-directed vow to never dwell on Lee Smolin’s trudge of a talk on science and democracy. It’s not like the presentation is a total waste; Lee is not that bad of a speaker, and it’s a topic that certainly could be followed to interesting conclusions. Unfortunately, the very fact that it has potential is why it’s so painful to consider, as the majority of it is squandered in the execution.
Lee had the opportunity hear to “wow” his audience by drawing the parallels between the scientific and democratic systems and what such a connection might mean. Instead, the viewer is subjected to dubious claims, atrocious power point slides, half-hearted “parallels”, and a conclusion that will leave one’s head raw from all the subsequent scratching.
At the very end of the video, a shot of the audience graces the screen, with many of the participants choosing to stare at their watches rather than the speaker. If that is not an advocation to stay very, very far away, I don’t know what is.
The least inspiring video that I watched was Jehane Noujaim about world peace. It wasn;t very interesting to me because that’s what everyone wants and it’s going to take a long time for that to truly happen.
The most least inspiring video was Charles Anderson’s Dragonflies That Cross Oceans. I became rally bored with this video. I felt like I was watching a long video from a biology class. I like biology, but this video did not grasp me. I felt like it should be for a news special. I also had a hard time figuring out what to write about. I do respect Charles Anderson and his contribution to wildlife. However, I think that this should be only for people who are really fascinated by insects. If you are in for a lesson on dragonflies then this is the video for you. If you are not then watch something else.
John Lloyd: Inventories the Invisible
I would first like to point out that this talk was not bad. I did enjoy it, but pertaining to the question at hand, it was not inspiring. It was really a list of facts about the world, interesting and intriguing, but not inspiring. A more inspiring video to me would be one that can relate to each and every viewer and their own way. However, this talk simply talked about overlooked, universal details.
I would not exactly recommend not to watch it, though. If you are interested in learning about some invisible details in our daily lives, then go right ahead. If you would like to be inspired, however, save this one for later. The speaker was adequate, however the content was not exactly ‘inspiring’. It will certainly make you think, though.