I watched it a while ago, but from what I remember it’s partly that conservatives are not very creative. It’s an old bit but it’s true that lots and lots of mainstream conservative pundits tried to make it as writers in Hollywood, or at least as comedians before failing and turning to right-wing grift and money.
Another point is that political comedy, by its nature, has to express an political opinion, or else it’s not “political” comedy. The left wing can do this easily as a lot of left wing problems tend to punch up to the rich or to corporations. On the other hand, the political opinion a lot of conservative comics find “funny” is the fact that they hate women and minorities.
Unfortunately for them, the country is a little too WOKE to do black face anymore so they have to try to obscure that opinion with weird contrived bits. Bits so contrived that they end up having to spell out the joke at the end about how the funny part was that they hate women and minorities. (There are clips of this in the video). That’s a double whammy of bad comedy because it’s already a shitty premise and it breaks many rules of comedy such as punching down and explaining the joke.
Just watched it, what it basically boils down to is that nowadays most “comedy” from US conservatives isn’t meant to be funny, it’s meant to “own the libs.” So instead of coming up with witty, valid criticism of Democrats, they do whatever they can to try to get a rise out of them, which leads to a bunch of nonsense that is more concerned with making a political point and upsetting people than it is with actually being funny or even true.
Cowardice is not wasting 1.5 hours what friendly commenters just summarized in a couple of sentences?
Thank you Google for providing us with your shitty platform that incentivizes people to create bloated content wasting countless hours of people’s lifetimes in search for some crumbs of information that could be written down as a couple of words and be searchable.
the average length of a Mr. Beast video is 16 minutes long. Video Essayists on YouTube are famously commonly demonetized and almost if not all are reliant on alternative monetization methods (read: patreon, nebula, etc) to be able to stay afloat. your take is very silly and patently false.
OK, now I got your point. But that’s not what I meant.
My criticism aims at the “misuse” of the video format. I’m always annoyed when I want to look something up and instead of a written sentence I get pointed to a 10 min video.
Mr Beast’s content is very visual entertainment, like TV - that’s the kind of content we had on YouTube from the very beginning and video makes total sense.
For providing information video isn’t always a good choice (the only exception in my opinion is craftsmanship but even then text with photos is better). Those essayists may not be able to live off it but they do get money for each view which they wouldn’t if they wrote a paper or blog post. So they are incentivized to make videos instead of using the superior format and write it down (scientific papers are never videos). And to get those juicy clicks they make their stupid shocked face thumbnails even for the most serious, dry content.
oh lord I’m not watching a hour long video. Can someone give the the synopsis?
I watched it a while ago, but from what I remember it’s partly that conservatives are not very creative. It’s an old bit but it’s true that lots and lots of mainstream conservative pundits tried to make it as writers in Hollywood, or at least as comedians before failing and turning to right-wing grift and money.
Another point is that political comedy, by its nature, has to express an political opinion, or else it’s not “political” comedy. The left wing can do this easily as a lot of left wing problems tend to punch up to the rich or to corporations. On the other hand, the political opinion a lot of conservative comics find “funny” is the fact that they hate women and minorities.
Unfortunately for them, the country is a little too WOKE to do black face anymore so they have to try to obscure that opinion with weird contrived bits. Bits so contrived that they end up having to spell out the joke at the end about how the funny part was that they hate women and minorities. (There are clips of this in the video). That’s a double whammy of bad comedy because it’s already a shitty premise and it breaks many rules of comedy such as punching down and explaining the joke.
Just watched it, what it basically boils down to is that nowadays most “comedy” from US conservatives isn’t meant to be funny, it’s meant to “own the libs.” So instead of coming up with witty, valid criticism of Democrats, they do whatever they can to try to get a rise out of them, which leads to a bunch of nonsense that is more concerned with making a political point and upsetting people than it is with actually being funny or even true.
Coward
Cowardice is not wasting 1.5 hours what friendly commenters just summarized in a couple of sentences?
Thank you Google for providing us with your shitty platform that incentivizes people to create bloated content wasting countless hours of people’s lifetimes in search for some crumbs of information that could be written down as a couple of words and be searchable.
Pessimism is easy and makes you feel smarter than everyone without having to try anything yourself. It’s kind of a win-win for your ego I guess.
absolutely Galaxy brain take, longform video essays are incentivized by Google?? somebody tell mr beast, he’s not gonna believe this
Not sure what you’re implying. That the incentive is obvious? Well, then why post shitty video content instead of writing a short reply?
Or are you saying it’s not true and somehow the guy making dozens of millions off YouTube (so he’s paid by Google) is your counter-example?
the average length of a Mr. Beast video is 16 minutes long. Video Essayists on YouTube are famously commonly demonetized and almost if not all are reliant on alternative monetization methods (read: patreon, nebula, etc) to be able to stay afloat. your take is very silly and patently false.
OK, now I got your point. But that’s not what I meant.
My criticism aims at the “misuse” of the video format. I’m always annoyed when I want to look something up and instead of a written sentence I get pointed to a 10 min video.
Mr Beast’s content is very visual entertainment, like TV - that’s the kind of content we had on YouTube from the very beginning and video makes total sense.
For providing information video isn’t always a good choice (the only exception in my opinion is craftsmanship but even then text with photos is better). Those essayists may not be able to live off it but they do get money for each view which they wouldn’t if they wrote a paper or blog post. So they are incentivized to make videos instead of using the superior format and write it down (scientific papers are never videos). And to get those juicy clicks they make their stupid shocked face thumbnails even for the most serious, dry content.
???