>
The rise and success of "TED talks" as a non-American struck me as the epitome of the American "post-empire" mindsetTED talks were limited to «rich and successful people»: there have been researchers and just experts. The rise of TED talks could have struck you as the positive potential of being able to informing a public in very condensed messages.
While you see a «"post-empire" [local] mindset», others would call a worldwide-spreading virus revealed in the thirst for "inspiring". Which not only is unleashed emotion for the sake of it: oftentimes it is emotional porn, when acted on basis which are thinner than its dried-up context (when the "feel" is much larger than the facts). This celebration of the "feel" blinding the "see" may be decadent, but it is not limited to the «"post-empire"».
Anderson (founder of Zzap!, for example) was and is an enthusiast, an enthusiast he remains, his creatures may naturally be consequently influenced. He had a chat with an irritated Linus Torvalds, who had to explain it that his pleasure as an engineer was to see cleverly built engines, not, well, "emotional porn" (and an unhappy Anderson greeted him at the end with a "Thank you for the Internet"?!). But mind you, good results can be an emergent side effect of enthusiasm: without Anderson, no Zzap! and no TED, and we all would be poorer.
Poorer, because TED, more and more unfiltered (the selected number of issues of 15 years ago has multiplied - the quality fall is as expected), produces lots of noise mixed with the signal, but good TED talks have been had and are still produced today.
The three names you threw in may indicate you check TED with an interest leaning towards colossal business enterprise; an interest towards research aimed to productive enterprise would be a more fitting target, sometimes met.