I am conducting a study about something that has been rustling my jimmies for a while. I recently set up a completely virgin YouTube account and only played media reviews from one channel for less than an hour and already proved my autistic hypothesis.
MEDIA ESSAYS ARE CANCER.
A lot of former viners started making commentary back in 2017 and ever since started to mutate into talking about random shit or became political. At some point, their viewers discovered r/breadube and realized that they too could make 40 minutes worth of saying nothing on their bedrooms to pay their student loans. What you get are videos that mix elements of post-tea drama (faggots that talked about controversies and took sides emotionally) and the current breadtube formula with a lot of low-smug energy. These days Danny Gonzalez, Kurtis Konner and Eddy Burbank moved their MO to that but the truly autistic comes from people who are blatantly ripping them off. What makes it worse is some are blatantly view-botting and sub-botting their channels.
If you use YouTube to watch media reviewing or commentary then you are likely familiar with some of these elements:
> Thumbnail features YouTuber reacting at something while covered by an outline. The background features at least two other humans and at least one phrase. Ex. "who asked for that?", who is this even for?". If this type of video is a collaboration it has both creators on the sides with the same general gimmick.
> Thumbnail features Youtuber centered and outlined. The background features several articles and photos. The phrase usually is at the bottom center.
> Title is usually a question or statement about a group of people or media. Every Word Has Its First Letter Capitalized.
> YouTuber sits in bedroom or living, mic in hand. Pacing is dictated by the inclusion of footage of the subject.
> One segment can be opened by the YouTuber slowly walking to sit and sigh loudly while sipping from a cup.
> Writing has the same pacing as a talk show, with YouTuber "refuting" footage with a wisecrack. This is followed by exaggerated gestures (ex. opening eyes widely, grinning at the camera) to imply disbelief.
> YouTuber holds academic-based studies and personal anecdotes on the same level. Subjects are usually chosen from a place of perceived expertise. Ex. Asian woman talks about asian fetishism, black man talks about tokenism.
These video essays tend to lean more towards being opinion pieces and tend to lack the perceived Breadtube standard to high production value. They also weaponize the algorithm by virtue of being media reviews and commentary.
I have been compiling a list of names because my main account was used for view botting and to prove my point I will type the titles of a couple of essays that are competing for the most retarded.
Identity, Gender, and VR Chat (Why is everyone in VR an anime girl?)
The Postmodern Horror of TikTok's Encanto Discourse
Substitute Teaching For This Professor's Femboy Lesson
The Failure of Black Disney (& Discourse)
Will Smith and the Struggle of Black Boyhood
WHY Are There So Many Nazi Sympathizer Movies?
My end game is to pick the 10 most retardedly named and understand why all feel the same.