“Does It Always Matter Who’s Right?”: The Ethics of Debate and Media Consumption on YouTube Response Videos

The Responsibility of YouTube, and Its “Inhabitants”

From spending countless hours watching basketball analytics videos of JxmyHighroller, learning about productivity, education, career, and relationship tips from Ali Abdaal, to following the wildest challenges that Michelle Khare embarks on a week-to-week basis, it’s fair to say that much of my free time on the weekend is devoted to the virtual realm of YouTube, for both the good and the bad. This platform offers endless possibilities and access to information, removing barriers to education inequality and helping to connect millions of content creators and consumers around the world together. Furthermore, it empowers both the creators and content consumers, who have the freedom to express their knowledge and opinion to the world through a computer click. However, this strength, like many things in our multifaceted world, is a double-edged sword. The very nature of the Google-owned corporation, despite continuous cybersecurity updates it has had over the years to increase interaction within this mini-society, can give way to harassment towards users of the community, and the exacerbation of misinformation and incorrect knowledge to an audience easily influenced by peer pressure.

Dr. Alice Marwick, a Principal Researcher at the Center for Information, Technology, and Public Life at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, has been devoting her career to study the political, social, and cultural implications of popular social media technologies. In her paper titled ““We Dissect Stupidity and Respond to It”: Response Videos and Networked Harassment on YouTube”, she discussed the usage of response videos by far-right online subcultures to spread disinformation, promote harassment, and enact cyberbullying, and we at the Parr Center were honored to attend an Ethics Around the Table (EAT) with her on the afternoon of March 23. Listening to her talk about her recent research on the ethics of response videos and networked harassment on YouTube opened my mind to new reflections that I had not thought of in my first round of reading. I could not ask for more than delicious arepas (thank you Juliana!) with insightful ethical discussion about one of the most crucial topics of discussion in today’s digital age on a Thursday afternoon :)

So, what is with this big mess around the implications of YouTube “response videos”? As defined in Marwick’s research, a user films response videos to offer counterarguments to a video uploaded by another user, and while these videos are often framed as “healthy” forums of debate, those being targeted express their frustration towards these vehicles for harassment from the creator and their networked audience. YouTube has long faced continuous criticism from the public about not doing enough to protect its users from harassment, and even though it has introduced new policies to prevent materials that insult or demean others on their race, gender, or sexual orientation, response videos slip through the narrow policy cracks as creators use smart tactics to portray themselves as “defenders of public discourse and their targets as irrational and immoral.” Response videos, in their purest forms, would not be problematic in a utopian YouTube world where creators can freely broadcast their thoughts in an egalitarian space. In reality, systemic discrimination and radical ideologies are deeply embedded in every online interaction that favors public discourse and emotions rather than empirical evidence.

I highly encourage anyone interested in this topic of online harassment to check out Professor Marwick’s full academic paper, where she goes into more details about the influence of political ideologies on social concepts and YouTube’s inconsistent responses to harassments on their platforms.

Speaker Series Discussion

Although our Pod did not have the chance to grab lunch with Professor Marwick, her research article led to an insightful discussion where we deliberated the ethical dilemma of harassing people whose lives depend on their streaming and online presence, using people’s identity as a point of attack instead of data-driven evidence, and the scary amplification effect of a popular social media account shaming an individual. With many Pod members having debate experiences, we discussed various techniques these creators of response videos use to stimulate a faux debate in which what they seem to be doing is the right thing for the online community. I grappled with the idea of social pressure, where a seemingly unnoticeable action, or inaction, can ignite a chain of radical domino effects. It is the responsibility of active participants in social media platforms to be aware of what we are consuming, producing, and contributing to the space. 

I am incredibly grateful to be a member of the Speaker Series Pod, and of the big Parr Heel family, for all the amazing opportunities to be engaged in ethical discussions and reflections with notable scholars around the globe. Never would I imagine having a chance to read a scholar’s paper and getting lunch with them in the same week! People at the Parr Center have taught me to be thoughtful, to deal with all situations as ethical problems, and to treat everyone the way you want to be treated – with the utmost respect and love – because you will never know what impact you will have on them, even when online.