Phil – he made the Vote Different video. Campaigns don’t control the message anymore. Bloggers don’t care about getting exclusives or access because they’re more interested in expressing their opinions first than getting the news first. People won’t come just cos you built a portal. You need something for people to do.

Robert Greenwald. Shows the Fox Attacks: Black America video, where instead of arguing that Fox news repeatedly smears African-American culture, they simply show excerpts showing them doing that again and again.

(sorry, fell out)

Steve Grove – runs YouTube’s news and politics section. YouTube is actively going out and trying to get candidates and non-profits etc onto “the platform” (I assume that means YouTube – oh, no, it means “YouChoose”, YouTube’s political division.) What makes a good political video?

  1. Keep the camera rolling – get as much footage as you can. To capture authentic moments you need to be capturing everything.
  2. Keep the content fresh. Upload new videos, keep new things in the stream
  3. Reach out! Don’t think of YouTube just as a shrunken TV-screen. Ask for responses.
  4. Be personal. Some people thing YouTube is about being hip or edgy, but really YouTube’s demographic is 18 to 55. Be authentic.

Discover more from Jill Walker Rettberg

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

2 thoughts on “Panel: The online video revolution: message-jamming and campaigns

  1. JoseAngel

    Thanks so much for the coverage, Jill. Sparing us jetlag.

  2. Jill

    Heh, I appreciate the appreciation, JoseAngel. Makes me feel like such a good person to be doing this hard, hard work 🙂

Leave A Comment

Recommended Posts

AI STORIES

AI-generated stories have longer endings than human stories

My colleague Jessica Witte has just shared a preprint where she compared the emotional arcs of the stories we generated using gpt-4o-mini to those of human-authored (pre-2022) stories from the subreddit r/WritingPrompts, conveniently gathered in this dataset. She found a distinct difference in the endings of the LLM-generated stories: both […]

How to peer review a paper in 2026

Dorothy Bishop, a psychologist, wrote a useful list of what reviewers need to look out now that so many papers are bad science that looks good thanks to LLMs. Read her whole blog post, she explains it well, but here’s a brief version because I’m pretty sure we’ll be needing […]

“So what if it was ChatGPT? It *could* have been true!”

I recently read a good article on the different kinds of truth a language model operates with by Luke Mann, Liam Magee and Vanicka Arora, Truth Machines: Synthesizing Veracity in AI Language Models, but despite its lovely typology of truths (consensus, correspondence, coherence and pragmatic) it doesn’t help me with […]

AI STORIES

AI shimmer and sparkle

I have this hunch that sparkles and glow and shimmer are somehow a point in the latent spaces of LLMs that have more connections than you would expect. Perhaps their connotation to magic and to the unknown matches some of the mystique of genAI? Or perhaps these words are used […]

Don’t do a systematic review if you’re in the humanities

This paper is a great example of why you probably shouldn’t use a systematic literature review for a theoretical and conceptual research question like “How does artificial intelligence affect the perception of authenticity and aura in art?” However, if you’re looking for an annotated list of 48 recent articles about […]