3 ms·
The challenge, as he mentions a bit at the end, is that "no manipulation" isn't an option. He didn't have to climb up on a ladder, or post-edit 3D labels on top
by SpicyLemonZest 5y ago
The challenge, as he mentions a bit at the end, is that "no manipulation" isn't an option. He didn't have to climb up on a ladder, or post-edit 3D labels on top of his presentation, or make a cute little animation of a present unwrapping into another present. He did all of that to make the video more engaging, which means nothing more or less than manipulating people to keep watching. Crazy titles bug me personally a lot more than fancy editing or weird props, but as long as they're not so misleading I can't make an informed decision on what to watch, it's hard to begrudge content creators an engagement tool that can make such a difference.
- colechristensen 5y agoWhat is and is not "manipulation" depends on your definition of manipulation. A very narrow definition captures only intentional harm and a very broad definition excludes only existing in a vacuum isolated from the universe. It is pretty easy, when you are engaging in questionable manipulation to justify what you are doing by picking a somewhat broader line for what counts as manipulation compared to what you are doing and then saying "see! there's no way I can't manipulate!". Comforting perhaps but more of a rationalization than a reason. When you make your decisions about quality with popularity as a basis, there is no way you don't end up being manipulative with or without intent. This is what is wrong with the attention economy, it evolves the world to find and exploit the weaknesses in humans.