My trump videos have been published for three weeks, and I would like to provide some commentary and lessons I’ve learnt. My best video, “Why trump is a master persuader” has 600 views as of today, while the other video “Why trump will make a good president” has almost 200 views. This is much, much less than I want, and was expecting, but it’s a great lesson, because it tells some things about why it was a failure. Lets cover a few of these reasons:
- I spent way too long on figuring out a good title. Yes, the keywords do matter, especially if this video is a one-off, and I spent much too much time, almost 2 days testing out new titles and names. I started out with very bombastic titles, that were great for clickbait, but it turned out that the video didn’t live up to the standard of the title, and it wasn’t shared. So I settled on the titles above, and I believe that those titles are conservative, but good clickbait. The second title is especially good, because when trump becomes president, people will start searching for this title, and it will get many views from that. It’s like one video on Youtube which started out with very few views, and then started to get views as people saw trump would win, titled “Why trump will be the next president”. The first video, as I expected, got many scott adams readers, and was liked, but not shared. In my view, the title only matters if you have few videos, and few followers. Otherwise, if you have a huge base, you will hit the tipping point before no matter what your title is. The key, if you have lots of subscribers, is to ignite curiosity from your loyal subscribers, while when I have only 40 subscribers, it’s to match keywords and search terms. But I know that because I will be doing this for a long time, it will get more and more views, as I get more subscribers, just like how casey neistat’s video has no views.
- So how could I have shared it better? I shared my video on my Facebook, on scott adams blog, but that was it. It was shared more than all my other videos, but I don’t think my lack of sharing was a problem.
- The video wasn’t as good as I wanted it to be. It was very persuasive, if you watched it, but it was not in any way a good YouTube video, and not shareable material. People didn’t want to share a pro-trump video, because it came off that way. But then, trump supporters didn’t want to share a pro-clinton video, because it also came off that way. The video had way too many unorganized points, and it was not structured well. I dived into each topic very quickly, and in especially the first video, the rhythm is off. The second video is much more is much better quality, and the rhythm is much better, but the structure was not very good. If I had a do-over, I would structure as “to figure out trump” video, where we try to label trump, and figure out what he is, sort of like an adventure. We’d start by saying “trump is a racist”, but no, that’s not right, so “trump is an outsider”, but that’s not right, so “trump is a negotiator”, but that’s not all, “trump is a conservative”. But really, that’s doesn’t matter, because what makes a good president? Some of my favourite channels on youtube are Every Frame a Painting, Charisma on Command, Film Theory, Smarter Every Day, and Casey Neistat. Each of them create very well thought out and structured videos. Some of them start out with a problem-solution, others peak your interest, and others are feel good videos. I also loved six-seven film’s about HST and speed kills. I’ve realized that there are a few ways you can approach video essays. First, you can speak in a very sure tone of voice, on something extremely silly, such as what casey neistat does. He speaks in an extremely confident voice where he’s talking about an emergency brake. But when it comes to more serious matters, such as politics, or facts such as films, Every Frame a Painting is the best example. Instead of telling you so many facts, he supports each argument by giving examples, so that you are not persuaded by what he tells you, but you come up with your own conclusions based off his examples. Because I don’t have authority, this is how I must approach my videos. I have to support each and every point, into a bullet proof argument, and let the watcher come up to his own conclusions, leading the way. I must appeal to authority, and focus on each and every single topic thoroughly.