Why Ignoring Videos on the Internet is Not Unreasonable
Do you ever find yourself disregarding points of view shared on the internet solely because they require watching a video to engage with them? Is this a fair stance to take? Can videos be too emotionally charged and not sufficiently transparent to be trusted as a reliable source of information? In this article, we explore the reasons behind ignoring videos on the internet and discuss how to foster more productive online discussions.
The Demerits of Video as a Medium for Argumentation
Video can be a powerful tool for communication, but it is not without its drawbacks. Despite its effectiveness in creating emotional connections, video can also be misleading. Unlike text, which allows the reader to pause and consider each argument, a video inherently demands a passive engagement. This format can obscure the complexity of the argument being made, making it seem more compelling than it actually is:
Video eliminates the ability to go back and forth, test assumptions, and fully follow an argument. A skilled director can manipulate emotions and present arguments in a favorable light, making flawed ideas seem more convincing.
Most TED talks and similar content, although potentially plausible, rely on early-stage ideas or shallow engagement. The use of video often introduces extraneous factors such as the speaker’s charisma and emotional appeals, which can cloud the underlying message.
Important aspects, such as unstated assumptions, are often left unaddressed in videos. Consumers of the video may be unaware of these underlying assumptions, leading to a misunderstanding of the argument.
Situating Non-Video Dismissal Within English Discourse
The assumption that any point of view requiring a video is inherently unreasonable can be quite prevalent, especially in digital spaces like Quora. A recent example from Quora highlights this stance, where the user dismisses the need to watch a video simply because it is a video. This position is justified on multiple counts:
Personal Challenges in Understanding Video Content
Hearing Impairment: For individuals with hearing impairments, watching videos can be particularly frustrating. Without good closed captioning, understanding the content becomes near impossible. It is akin to relying on a poorly spoken statement with no contextual support.
Critical Analysis: As a filmmaker and film teacher, one becomes acutely aware of the manipulative nature of videos. The 'evidence' presented is often a construct of the filmmaker, rather than authentic documentary evidence. Images and sounds in videos can be staged or selective, overshadowing the real content.
Time Investment: The request to watch a video, particularly one chosen by another person, can be seen as an imposition of time without guarantee of value. It reflects a lack of confidence in the argument itself, as the speaker cannot make a strong case without visual aids.
Lack of Intellectual Support: It is common to see individuals drown in the surface-level appeal of a video and forget to substantiate their arguments with clear and concise reasoning. Videos can serve as a crutch, allowing people to echo their beliefs without understanding the depth of the issue.
Strategies for Fostering More Productive Online Dialogue
While it is understandable to dismiss certain online arguments, we should also strive to create a more inclusive and thoughtful debate. Here are some strategies that can help:
Encourage Written Communication: Instead of relying on videos, encourage the use of coherent written arguments. This gives all participants a fair chance to present their views and supports the development of critical thinking skills.
Quality Control: Promote the use of reliable sources and ensure that arguments are well-supported. This can be done through the inclusion of citations, reliable references, and clear logical sequences.
Emotional Intelligence: Recognize the biases that can arise from strong emotional appeals in videos. Encourage the use of data and evidence over emotional storytelling to build more robust and sustainable arguments.
Inclusivity: Consider the needs of all participants, including those with disabilities or language barriers. Provide closed captions, use plain language, and promote accessibility in all forms of communication.
Overall, while videos can be powerful, they are not a necessary medium for reasoned argumentation. By fostering an environment that values clear, concise, and well-supported communication, we can create more productive and inclusive online discussions.