TED is popular because there are enough people who like it, and there's enough good translators to translate it into many other peoples' languages. They work hand in hand. Most people wouldn't care too much about TED if it wasn't in their language - there's many good conferences in many countries in many languages, but if they aren't well covered in the media or the videos etc aren't translated/subtitled into ones own language, there's no point in getting interested in them.

TED's objectives aren't to promote Esperanto, and they would probably see it as favoring Esperanto, which they probably don't want to do. Their idea is to neutrally discuss world-changing ideas, not to use their programs as a way for they themselves to experiment with them.

Thus, you'd have to overcome that problem, while still having to overcome the problem that by making TED use only Esperanto, they'd lose many participants unable to use Esperanto, and that might create a slump in memberships and activity that TED can't recover from. Of course, it could be possible to slowly implement EO-only programs without replacing all the English ones, but someone up the top might see that Esperanto isn't beneficial enough for them to stay healthy financially, and then get rid of the EO programs.

Effectively this is why Esperanto hasn't succeeded on a wide global stage, there's too much bureaucracy and traditional barriers it has to overcome...

ceigered:TED is popular because there are enough people who like it, and there's enough good translators to translate it into many other peoples' languages. They work hand in hand. Most people wouldn't care too much about TED if it wasn't in their language - there's many good conferences in many countries in many languages, but if they aren't well covered in the media or the videos etc aren't translated/subtitled into ones own language, there's no point in getting interested in them.

TED's objectives aren't to promote Esperanto, and they would probably see it as favoring Esperanto, which they probably don't want to do. Their idea is to neutrally discuss world-changing ideas, not to use their programs as a way for they themselves to experiment with them.

Thus, you'd have to overcome that problem, while still having to overcome the problem that by making TED use only Esperanto, they'd lose many participants unable to use Esperanto, and that might create a slump in memberships and activity that TED can't recover from. Of course, it could be possible to slowly implement EO-only programs without replacing all the English ones, but someone up the top might see that Esperanto isn't beneficial enough for them to stay healthy financially, and then get rid of the EO programs.

Effectively this is why Esperanto hasn't succeeded on a wide global stage, there's too much bureaucracy and traditional barriers it has to overcome...

I think you missed the whole issue here. What i suggest is to produce an Esperanto TED but not asking TED com to do it.

All things begin from small just as human beings. If there is no small group to test out, there would not be any results.

Before doing it, you are already putting the programme into the failure.

Is that what life is for you ?

I'm a bit confused, are we talking about a TED in Esperanto or about Esperanto?

razlem:I'm a bit confused, are we talking about a TED in Esperanto or about Esperanto?

It is a similiar programme or better one like TED.

Don't dream to negotiate with TED.com for the esperanto version. Other languages would want that too.

Do it by the esperanto speakers. From small to what it may go.

TED.com is not popular in a day.

EoMy:I think you missed the whole issue here. What i suggest is to produce an Esperanto TED but not asking TED com to do it.

Aaah! Now I understand what you mean. The title of this thread is misleading!

EoMy:Before doing it, you are already putting the programme into the failure.

Is that what life is for you ?

Not necessarily, I like to look at both all sides of the argument, and even all the misinformation about an argument. In this case though, to be honest, I just don't feel the important of an EO version of TED other than sheer propaganda value. (To me, a good idea doesn't need to be spoken in a specific language. Esperanto is a good idea, but that doesn't necessarily boost the benefits of ideas conceived in its words. But I'm digressing).

How the TED in esperanto is misleading ? TED without dot com.

TED is a nonprofit devoted to Ideas Worth Spreading. It started out (in 1984) as a conference bringing together people from three worlds: Technology, Entertainment, Design. .

Does TED belong to the TED dot com ?

TED=Technology, Entertainment and Design.

EoMy:How the TED in esperanto is misleading ? TED without dot com.

TED is a nonprofit devoted to Ideas Worth Spreading. It started out (in 1984) as a conference bringing together people from three worlds: Technology, Entertainment, Design. .

Does TED belong to the TED dot com ?

TED=Technology, Entertainment and Design.

It does belong to them:
© TED CONFERENCES, LLC

And when we speak of TED we speak about TED Confereces, LLC. When we speak of 'technology, entertainment and design' then it's not necessarily about TED, but they might have a copyright on those 3 words in that order, so I wouldn't use them in a official organisation's name .