To paraphrase Homer Simpson’s observation about beer. I read an interesting post about the seeming elitism of the TED Conferences and I somewhat agree with the author’s assertion:
“This is classic TED. Take an idea that has gained currency. Self-appoint some (non-genuine) champion of that idea. Change the idea subtly to align with the political preferences of the ‘elite’ audience. Then market the new version of the idea (and its new champions) as the original idea that has been and is widely accepted.”
It’s not just TED. You see this all over the web. A few consultants, speakers, writers, whatever get together and self-proclaim each other the elite of their field (an especially audacious example – The Digerati). They build a website, hold online conferences, and video their talks so that the “masses” can bask in the assembled geniuses.
Sometimes, the stuff is good. I especially enjoy the TED talks and some of the Digerati have interesting insights. Other times, it is pure pretentious crap. And woe be to any outsider who dares question the wisdom of this assembly of genius.
But, so what? Before the Internet and Web 2.0, these mutual admiration societies could run a magazine or discussion salon that few others had the money or expertise to run. Now, anyone with an online connection can become their own elite group. Don’t like TED? Then, build your own group of gurus. Start a Facebook group, create a group blog, film some videos. Gather around your friends, give each other titles, and publish your great works on Scribd.
Soon, you will be one of the elite and will have lots of fans. And other people who can’t stand you and create their own group in response to your elitism. Democratizing elitism through social networking.