Typologies of the popular science web video

Morcillo, Jesús Muñoz; Czurda, Klemens; Trotha, Caroline Y. Robertson-von

doi:10.22323/2.15040202

Cited by 60 publications

(68 citation statements)

References 1 publication

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…In this way, our classification corroborates the conclusions reached in similar studies on the existence of a wide variety of genres and subgenres [Muñoz Morcillo, Czurda and Robertson-von Trotha, 2016;Burgess and Green, 2013]. These different formats have then been classified into two groups, according to the channel for which they were intended, with the aim of establishing their fundamental differences.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 86%

“…However, if the capacities of the Internet are to be fully taken advantage of, the messages should be adapted to its requirements and include elements that foster interaction with the user; something that, as has been demonstrated in this study, does not occur in all cases. This result is in contrast with those of Muñoz Morcillo, Czurda and Robertson-von Trotha [2016], which revealed that most videos analysed in their sample include typical elements that foster community building and allow for their dissemination. We believe that the differences in the results are due to the difference between the two samples.…”

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 70%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Online video on climate change: a comparison between television and web formats

González¹,

Avilés²,

Revuelta³

2017

JCOM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article proposes a classification of the current differences between online videos produced specifically for television and online videos produced for the Internet, based on online audiovisual production on climate change. The classification, which consists of 18 formats divided into two groups that allow comparisons to be made between television and web formats, was created through the quantitative and qualitative content analysis of a sample of 300 videos. The findings show that online video's capacity to generate visits is greater when it has been designed to be broadcast on the Internet than when produced for television. AbstractEnvironmental communication; Public perception of science and technology; Public understanding of science and technology; Science and media Keywords

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 86%

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 70%

Online video on climate change: a comparison between television and web formats

González¹,

Avilés²,

Revuelta³

2017

JCOM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Science communication on YouTube is getting increasingly professional. Also science communicators independent of institutional or personal commitments are applying progressively higher standards, for instance concerning aesthetics, and production quality (Muñoz Morcillo et al, 2016). Some science YouTubers, such as Veritasium 5 , VSauce 6 , or SciShow 7 for instance, reach many million viewers on YouTube and also have millions of subscribers to their video channels (Geipel, 2017(Geipel, , 2018.…”

Section: Science and Environmental Communication On Youtubementioning

confidence: 99%

Science and Environmental Communication on YouTube: Strategically Distorted Communications in Online Videos on Climate Change and Climate Engineering

Allgaier

2019

Front. Commun.

134

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The online video-sharing website YouTube is extremely popular globally, also as a tool for information on science and environmental topics. However, only little is known about what kind of information users find when they are searching for information about climate science, climate change, and climate engineering on YouTube. This contribution presents results from an exploratory research project that investigates whether videos found on YouTube adhere to or challenge scientific consensus views. Ten search terms were employed to search for and analyze 200 videos about climate and climate modification topics, which are contested topics in online media. The online anonymization tool Tor has been used for the randomization of the sample and to avoid personalization of the results. A heuristic qualitative classification tool was set up to categorize the videos in the sample. Eighty-nine videos of the 200 videos in the sample are supporting scientific consensus views about anthropogenic climate change, and climate scientists are discussing climate topics with deniers of climate change in four videos in the sample. Unexpectedly, the majority of the videos in the sample (107 videos) supports worldviews that are opposing scientific consensus views: 16 videos deny anthropogenic climate change and 91 videos in the sample propagate straightforward conspiracy theories about climate engineering and climate change. Videos supporting the scientific mainstream view received only slightly more views (16,941,949 views in total) than those opposing the mainstream scientific position (16,939,655 views in total). Consequences for the public communication of climate change and climate engineering are discussed in the second part of the article. The research presented in this contribution is particularly interested in finding out more about strategically distorted communications about climate change and climate engineering in online environments and in critically analyzing them.

show abstract

“…The internet and YouTube are obvious choices for investigating gender issues in science education. YouTube contains many different types of science-related videos, including many that are documentary, recreational and educational (Erviti & Stengler, 2016;Muñoz Morcillo, Czurda, & Trotha, 2016). It is widely used in school classrooms and by university students to support learning (e.g., Barry, Marzouk, Chulak-Oglu, Bennett, Tierney, & O'Keeffe, 2016;Tan & Pearce, 2012) as well as for leisure-time explorations of science related content, such as by watching TED Talks videos (see below) or science-related music videos (Allgaier, 2013).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

YouTube science channel video presenters and comments: female friendly or vestiges of sexism?

Thelwall

2018

AJIM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper analyses popular YouTube science video channels for evidence of attractiveness to a female audience. Design/methodology/approach: The influence of presenter gender and commenter sentiment towards males and females is investigated for 50 YouTube science channels with a combined view-count approaching ten billion. This is cross-referenced with commenter gender as a proxy for audience gender. Findings: The ratio of male to female commenters varies between 1 and 39 to 1, but the low proportions of females seem to be due to the topic or presentation style rather than the gender of the presenter or the attitudes of the commenters. Although male commenters were more hostile to other males than to females, a few posted inappropriate sexual references that may alienate females. Research limitations: Comments reflect a tiny and biased sample of YouTube science channel viewers and so their analysis provides weak evidence. Practical implications: Sexist behaviour in YouTube commenting needs to be combatted but the data suggests that gender balance in online science presenters should not be the primary concern of channel owners. Originality/value: This is the largest scale analysis of gender in YouTube science communication.

show abstract

Typologies of the popular science web video

Cited by 60 publications

References 1 publication

Online video on climate change: a comparison between television and web formats

Online video on climate change: a comparison between television and web formats

Science and Environmental Communication on YouTube: Strategically Distorted Communications in Online Videos on Climate Change and Climate Engineering

YouTube science channel video presenters and comments: female friendly or vestiges of sexism?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About