Skip to content

Why We Stopped Making Explainers: EXPLAINED

2019-03-15 · letter vlog · Hank · 3:56 · watch on YouTube

Topic: Internet & YouTube (also: Nerdfighteria) · mode: Personal essay · tags: community lore

Recalling the channel's decade of explainers since John's 2007 Nepal toilet-paper video, Hank asks why they stopped: 'explained' promises an honest whole story he doesn't trust himself to give, society blurs journalism and opinion, others do it better with editorial rigor, and audiences increasingly trust charisma over rigor.

What is said

The parts of the video and what is said in each (★ — how much it matters to the video).

00:00:00 — The channel's explainer history since John's Nepal toilet-paper video: Brazil, Israel and Palestine, Syria, US issues

  • ★★ Hank recalls John on October 26, 2007 explaining Nepal's political situation while eating toilet paper, which set the tone for a decade-plus of explainer-type videos on the channel. — 00:00:00
  • ★★ Hank lists explainer topics: Brazil, Israel and Palestine, Syria (twice), and US subjects: mass incarceration, net neutrality, Benghazi and tax plans. (playful) — 00:00:00

00:00:29 — They stopped making explainers; what the word 'explained' promises; the urge to shape the narrative

  • ★★★ Hank says explainers are some of their most successful content, people like them and they're good at them, but they have stopped making them, without ever discussing it. — 00:00:29
  • ★★ Hank says John's recent textbook video and his own copyright video aren't explainers: they lack the word 'explained' and are clearly the brothers' perspective. — 00:00:29

  • ★★★ To Hank, 'explained' promises an honest best-effort attempt to actually explain a thing, not to tell the story that works best for the explainer. — 00:00:29

    “this is going to be my honest to God best effort attempt to actually explain this thing”

  • ★★★ Hank says giving the whole story means choosing from huge amounts of information, with a strong urge to pick what suits you: the ultimate chance to shape a narrative fitting your and your audience's biases. — 00:00:29

  • ★★ Hank says explainers are extremely easy to do badly without people noticing how badly. — 00:01:15

00:01:45 — Explanatory journalism matters (Brexit); blurring journalism and opinion; others do it better

  • ★★★ Hank says explainers are not bad; he is a little proud of whatever role the channel had in the format's rise, because he thinks it is really important. — 00:01:45
  • ★★ Hank says explanatory journalism helps in an age when we must hold many opinions: he can't judge today's Brexit news without a refresher on five years of Brexit. — 00:01:45
  • ★★★ Hank says the channel is clearly personal perspective, society has a hard time telling journalism from opinion, and he does not want to help blur that line. — 00:02:14
  • ★★★ Hank says others began doing explainers better than they could, with editorial control, expert interviews and trained journalists working on them full-time, not just on a Tuesday. — 00:02:14

00:02:44 — Rigor versus charisma; Hank doubts he can be objective enough to say 'explained'

  • ★★ Hank says some of their later explainers introduced the same controls and standards, but that turned out to be really hard and time-consuming. — 00:02:44
  • ★★ Hank says, wryly, that society seems to need highly trained people dedicated only to explaining reality to us. (playful) — 00:02:44
  • ★★★ Hank worries that people want the opposite of editorial structures: individuals they trust because they share their values and are charismatic; trusting a source on charisma rather than rigor is bad. (hedged) — 00:02:44
  • ★★★ Hank suggests they may have stopped making so many explainers because they started to feel part of that trend. (hedged) — 00:03:14
  • ★★ Hank thinks they are good at explainers and misses them, but if they do them again they must be very careful about what they do and how they present it. — 00:03:14
  • ★★★ At bottom, Hank doesn't know that he trusts himself to conjure the level of objectivity he thinks the word 'explained' implies. — 00:03:14

In the description and comments

  • ★★ The description says they once planned a separate business making only explainers, but explainers proved difficult and expensive without a trusted face, and the project died in favor of Crash Course and SciShow. — video description · Crash Course, SciShow
  • ★★★ Hank says it is very important to understand what a powerful rhetorical tool an explainer can be when used to convince rather than explain, and how easily a bad one goes largely unnoticed. — video description
  • ★★★ Hank urges people to ask why they trust the voices they trust, how that trust was earned and whether it is worthwhile, and to be very choosy among the many ways to get information. — video description

Threads in this video

Mentioned

Central: journalism

Also: People: Kurt Vonnegut

Works: Timequake

Concepts: confirmation bias · copyright · expert · mass incarceration · tax · textbook · Toilet paper

Places: Brazil · Israel · Nepal · Palestine · Syria

Events: 2012 Benghazi attack · Brexit

Policies: Net neutrality

Only in the description or credits: Crash Course · SciShow

Also centred on journalism: Does "The Press" Hate YouTube? · A Lie I Heard this Week · Populism, Media Revolutions, and Our Terrible Moment

← Previous: Going Home with Alaska and Miles · Next → Writing and Marriage Advice from Michelle Obama