This is my main problem with the modern Youtube meta, every single "serious" topic video is +30 mins length. 10 years ago we were perfectly fine with 10 mins stuff but of course algorithms and advertising and nowadays most Youtuber is pushing longer and longer videos as if we are watching peak evening television reporting...

▲

kalleboo 3 days ago | parent | next [-]

Some creators still do 10 minute videos but whenever I watch one I feel I'm left with more questions than answers, I really prefer the deeper dives.

▲

robertlagrant 4 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Evening television reporting spends about 30s on any one topic, so much so that the dominant effect on the viewer is however the presenter framed the topic initially. This is nothing like that.

	▲	hdgvhicv 3 days ago \| parent [-]
		Typical package in the U.K. is about 3 minutes, the main story will have 10-15 minutes on it, with probably two pieces from different correspondents on different angles, an in studio interview, and a live. There’s then the in depth programs which spend half an hour or an hour on a specific subject (dispatches, panorama etc) People are less interested in long form news though, so public service broadcasters in the U.K. have a duty to reach as many people in as many ways.

▲

fishgoesblub 3 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

And people click on the those videos, and YouTube recommends them because people like them.

▲

Sesse__ 3 days ago | parent | prev [-]

There's a perfectly good format for long-form dives: An article. But no, everything needs to be a video because otherwise, how would anyone bother to consume it.

▲

TylerE 3 days ago | parent | next [-]

No, for the kind of content he produces video is absolutely essential, since much of it is either demonstrating audio and video playback (including things like artifacts and color distortions), and showing how the internal mechanisms operate on partially disassembled machines.

	▲	Sesse__ 3 days ago \| parent [-]
		You can do that just fine with the occasional video inside the article, though. I mean, significant parts of the video is just panning by some device while he's talking.

▲

rs186 3 days ago | parent | prev [-]

His videos have so much higher information density than texts can offer. Videos are just much more efficient and can explain things better for those topics.

▲

bigstrat2003 3 days ago | parent [-]

I can read an article about 10x faster than watch a video. I don't have a problem with Alec's videos per se, but it's crazy to claim that video is the medium with higher information density. Text is always going to be the better medium for transmitting information, except for cases where the unique advantages of video (moving pictures and sound) help.

▲

eldaisfish 3 days ago | parent [-]

there are things you can communicate well in text as well as things that make more sense with visuals.

Please, stop thinking in binaries.

▲

Telaneo 3 days ago | parent [-]

Articles are capable of using both. The main content can be in text, with an image, a gif or a short video or audio clip here and there to help explain if an illustration is better suited.

I wouldn't want to read a phone review that was text only, but one that has a set or two of images and video to show of the camera, a size comparison to a different phone, and you've got most of what you'd want to put in a video anyway. The rest of many youtube videos are just talking heads and stock footage. The substantive parts of many videos, the stuff that actually should be video for better information density, is rarely a majority of any given video.

Video is definitely a more engaging form of content for me, but claiming it's more effective at information transfer as compared to text is ridiculous.

▲

TylerE 3 days ago | parent [-]

And I don’t want to switch between reading and watching short video clips constantly. My brain doesn’t work that way.

▲

Telaneo 3 days ago | parent [-]

You probably don't need more than one or two video clips unless you're writing about video itself, say, comparing Ffmpeg renders or phone cameras. You certainly don't need any video for most subjects.

▲

TylerE 3 days ago | parent [-]

But that's exactly what he is talking about. He's not doing, like, car reviews.

	▲	Telaneo 2 days ago \| parent [-]
		He's doing a video about a format, not about video itself. How much of this video is comparisons of video itself? None that I could see. He's already done that video way back with his Betamax vs. VHS comparison. All the cases of him comparing the form factor, that is, the size of the casette, with something else, are easily shown with either pictures or diagrams.