Courtesy of TEDxNYUAD

Last Monday evening, large red X’s were taped to the ground, set a few inches apart, to form a trail that led to the NYU Abu Dhabi Institute theater. Most people that night would have immediately identified the X’s as the familiar large red sans-serif of the unmistakable TEDx brand.

For many, the red TED letters connote TED’s reputation for intellectually stimulating entertainment. If you did not learn of TEDxNYUAD’s first conference through their persistent Facebook campaign, you could not have missed the huge TEDxNYUAD wooden letters placed in the East Plaza, the campus walls peppered with small sheets bearing “4/19," the date of the conference and the large “ATTEND” posters taped onto overturned tables around campus.

One would have expected a large audience to attend the event considering how much buzz TEDx NYUAD had generated leading up it. However, the heavily promoted event was exclusive. Only 100 tickets were given out for the live event in a theater that can house 300.

Lead Organizer Alf Lim explained that the 100-person cap on the live audience was not an independent choice. It was a TEDx guideline meant to protect the speakers from stage fright. All TEDx events, independently organized TED events, must adhere to 136 pages of guidelines on branding and programming.

Tickets were given to distinguished guests from outside the university and a select pool of students chosen by lottery. Other students who wished to see the talks live were directed to the East Forum to watch it live-streamed from the theater.

Unfortunately, the live-stream was fraught with technical difficulties. The event’s exclusivity and poor live-stream video quality disengaged some viewers.

“I was impressed by the set up, but the sound would cut out and there would be lags and delays in the video,” explained junior Nia Wilson. “The live-stream was detrimental to the enjoyment of the talks. That extra proxy made it harder for the audience to connect with [the] speaker.”

In a New Yorker feature on TED’s popularity Nathan Heller wrote, “Volunteers who want to organize a TEDx event receive a hundred-and-thirty-six-page manual detailing regulations and requirements — advisories like ‘Webcast archives of TEDx events are not permitted’ and ‘The name of your event should always align left in relation to the TEDx part of the logo.’ Conferences that overstep major rules lose their TED license.”

Heller points out TED’s stringent branding rules and its ritualized, heavy-handed editorial process ensures that “all aspects of the conference are already shaped to make the ideas being presented fit for popular consumption.”

For TEDxNYUAD, this process took eight months, beginning in September. The central organizing team carefully selected speakers through two selection rounds involving staff and faculty. The team members were intensely involved in shaping the final talks and training the speakers. They invested six to eight hours on average per week throughout the entire process.

The 100-person audience cap was incongruous with the tremendous amount of time and effort spent on preparation. The final speakers went through four to nine drafts of their scripts, which were closely reviewed by the two mentors, an organizing team member and a faculty member assigned to each speaker. The speakers attended a public-speaking workshop in March to refine their speaking skills, as well as socials where they watched TED talks together. Over the course of seven months, the speakers formally rehearsed their speeches five times.

On that final evening, the talks flowed like a theatrical performance. The announcer had planned jokes and puns to transition between each talk. On cue, the speakers emerged from a black curtain and sprung into reciting their script. The performance was free of any technical difficulties or awkward pauses.

“We had spent so much time rehearsing, I felt like I was in an act of a play,” said freshman and speaker Amer Nasr.

Nasr noted his mentors critiqued him on the content and delivery of his speech. His faculty mentor, Director of Global Awards Doug Cutchins, helped him smoothen his transitions and restructure the flow of his talk. Nasr noted that the organizing committee recommended he not use the word revolution in his talk, although he did in the April 19 performance. Nasr feared his talk on fighting corruption in Brazil would be too controversial and he emphasized that he was not trying to incite protest, but to encourage students to raise their voice.

According to Lim, the organizing team’s heavy involvement was necessary to make the speakers feel comfortable on stage and empower them, especially those who had great ideas but were uncomfortable speaking to an audience on stage. The process was about teaching students how to become better, more confident public speakers.

Ultimately, the team’s main goal was to showcase the diversity of the student body and the present firsthand accounts of the stories behind student achievements.

However, this heavy involvement, as Heller notes, can at times “bleach lectures to an odd cultural beige.” Most of the talks featured similar tropes: sentimental childhood photos, universal metaphors, simple inspirational quotes and generalized life lessons that solved inherent existential problems.

“Their talks weren’t trivial, but presenting them with the trappings of a TED talk trivialized the speeches,” Wilson commented, watching from the East Forum.

Mira Flores is a staff writer. Email her at feedback@gzl.me.