ATTENTION: You are viewing a page formatted for mobile devices; to view the full web page, click HERE.

Main Area and Open Discussion > Living Room

Why Does Everything Have To Be Video?

<< < (4/4)

IainB:
The video about "why video converts better than plain text" essentially describes what was implicit in what I wrote above:
(b) A lowering of the lowest common denominator for the messaging in the whole system of communication, so that people with basic or no literary skills could reach out with and be reached through communication at the audio-visual level - which utilise our natural senses - rather than have to try to use an artificial encoding system (text) for communication.
______________________________________

--- End quote ---

Regardless of what the presenter in that video says he thinks, he would seem to be unaware of the research and psychology involved in perception and marketing and communications theory and which explains how video "converts" better than plain text. Since the '20s, psychology has been a fundamental tool used in developing marketing communications that create successful advertising and propaganda - stuff that sells an idea or concept. This is communication that gets through to the limbic system - a complex system of nerves and networks in the brain, necessary for our survival, controlling the basic emotions and drives, influencing the ego but generally having little or no influence on our higher level thinking centers.

Watching videos is a passive exercise that, because it employs our natural senses and has the potential to excite the limbic system, seems to slip around our critical thinking gates. Having to mentally decode text necessitates mental effort (not exciting the limbic system) and that would be more likely to engage our critical thinking capability - which is an artificial, learned skill (Edward De Bono).
These are the reasons why communicators who may want to condition an audience to believe that something is, for example (say) necessary or good or true or useful or desirable - when in fact there may be no rational basis for it if one thought critically about it - use persuasive multimedia, the most powerful being audio-video. But large staged events (e.g., Hitler's orchestrated rallies and speeches) are just as effective - if not more so - than video, because you're there in the midst of it all, experiencing it firsthand, getting carried away by it.
It's all about persuasion and "let your limbic system do your thinking for you" - and, depressingly, that's often just what we do, existing in the illusory state of ahamkara, imagining that we have rationally thought things through to get to this point, so we cannot be anything other than correct/right.

Americans would be familiar with this, having had a barrage of this sort of marketing communications for about a year now, in the election process. The very last thing the communicators probably wanted to trigger was the arousal of the audience's critical thinking potential, hence all the rousing BS, the flags, the staged strutting of the virtue-signalling film-star advocates (as if that even matters), the echo-chambers, the rabble-rousing pejorative labelling, the stigmatisation and demonisation of the Other, and the divisive identity politicking, etc., ad nauseam. It had to be like that and that's probably the only way it could be, if the objective persuasion was to be achieved - or, as one of the campaign operatives so aptly put it on camera:
“It doesn’t matter what the friggin’ legal and ethics people say, we need to win this motherf#cker."
--- End quote ---

For those as might want to follow this up, the topic of political persuasion in this election has been interestingly explored and analysed on the SCOTT ADAMS' BLOG (of Dibert fame).
 
This all goes a long way to providing an answer to the question in the OP:
Why Does Everything Have To Be Video?
--- End quote ---
- the general answer probably being, "Because it sells by not burdening our little heads".

Absolutely classic that @Stephen66515 demonstartes this by using a video to communicate his POV on the matter, by "qouting" (showing) us a video that sorta says what he thinks, but doesn't bother articulating in text:
I want to throw my 2c into the pot here
So here is a video that sums up what I think: ...
--- End quote ---

Love it. Very droll.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[*] Previous page

Go to full version