Response Video: The Perils of BookTok!
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 20 фев 2023
- My email: st.donoghue [at] gmail
My Instagram: stevesbookstagram
My little Patreon, should you be feeling generous: / snappp
My poor neglected Goodreads: stevedonoghue
My encouragement to write for: openlettersreview.com/
My website: www.stevedonoghue.com/
The video I saw on Toasty Towns:
• The real issue with Bo...
The GQ article:
www.gq-magazine.co.uk/culture... 
Кино
New to your channel. It's so refreshing to know that I am not the only one who feels this way. I've questioned whether many Booktubers actually read the books they say they do. It's as if they read some reviews and decided to make a video. Especially when their opinions are not original in the slightest, they say what the other popular Booktubers say.
If you watch even half a dozen videos from BookTubers with over 100,000 subscribers, I don't think it's really possible to avoid these impressions. You can go in to those videos with the best of intentions, and you still won't be able to avoid it, in my opinion.
Everything you say is correct. It took me quite some time, in fact, to find channels like yours, and to breathe a sigh of relief, "ah, an *actual* reader, with - and here's the rub - something to *say* about literature, books and reading". The rest is gloss.
Precisely. Everything must flow from an interesting, genuine point of view on a compelling subject. I love this little corner of BookTube, where we all understand that.
Everything about Jack Edwards makes my stomach turn
It's pretty easy to spot the fakers IMO. The way they act in front of the camera is the 1st red flag. They act so ridiculous I can't imagine them being that way in real life. Another red flag is if they hold up the same 6-7 books that everyone else does. And the best one yet....if they hold up an 800 page paperback and said they read it in 2-3 days, but the spine isn't even cracked a bit. There's zero chance they read it. And in their review, they regurgitate shallow one-liners like "The characters where awesome!" that give no insight onto "why" they think they're awesome. Oh, and Daniel Green makes my skin crawl, but Merphy isn't all that bad.
I made a Tiktok a while back because I thought it would be fun to chat about books on it. I deleted it shortly after because I thought a few minuites wasn't enough time to talk about a book you are reading. I decided having a BookTok was pointless!
Thank you for making content and contributing. Your videos make me believe better discussion about books on the internet is possible!
That's why I watch the majority of my you tube on my browser. Adblock gets rid of the un-skipable ads. Never watched any Book or Tik Tok from when people share videos from there it has no appeal. I'm probably too old and no one would want to see me dance!
I am fascinated by these big channels, especially the ones that are very defensive whenever there is an article like this. It will be interesting to see what happens if RUclips starts pulling the plug on some channels, or if RUclips just bottoms out like other social media before them.
Fortunately, I don't need to worry about them attacking me for this video - they never watch BookTube & certainly completely ignore any channel with under 100K subscribers.
You mention big and professional booktube channels and you don't include yourself? The audacity.
Hah! My channel’s hardly big - and I don’t think even my most fervent Donoghuegenot would call it professional! Need I remind you that I’m currently on my third 30-minute shoulder bag video? Not exactly Big League stuff!
Hey Steve! Thanks for reacting to my video and for the fascinating response. I appreciate you not tearing me apart hahaha
As for the “it’s not our fault” point that I was making, the “our” is was referring to is the modern reader. I know a lot of people outside the internet who consume Colleen Hoover books (or insert any mainstream author) like it’s their last meal, and while I’m sure they got the recommendation from the algorithm, if they enjoy those books I don’t like the idea of someone looking down on them as if they are “bad readers” or in some way a part of the problem for enjoying something that may be shallow to a more seasoned reader.
I 100% agree with you about the large creators of book content though. I do watch a handful of huge creators, and with any of them I absolutely have to take their opinions with a grain of salt. I definitely fall for the “they are just like me!” marketing thing that all social media influencers do, and it wouldn’t be too crazy to suggest some of my points were perhaps too biased in their direction (although I really do like Merphy).
It was very interesting to hear from someone with a lot more time in the book social media space and I hope you don’t mind if I stick around :)
When The Book Leo does a video on their new eReader do they tell you that it's just a sponsored ad for a particular brand and platform?
Six blocks of unskippable adds??
I know! It's almost as bad as YOUR channel!
One of the earliest channels I watched on BookTube was Bazpierce! Barry was great!
the way daniel greene tried to fight so hard on the hill that brandon sanderson "changed publishing forever with his kickstarter" is still so laughable. it's obvious he knows nothing despite being an author himself
Steve.... Come on.... If someone randomly started slandering you like you've gone on in this video (and many other videos) you would be quitting RUclips...again.... Why can't we live and let live?
I've never quit BookTube ... obviously, since I'm still here, reading a comment in which you characterize me as a fit-pitching diva. And I spoke no slander in this video. And clearly we can indeed all live and let live, since the kind of channels I describe are still very much in business. But then, you don't really mean "Live and let live," do you? What you mean is, "I myself don't care about the subject you've raised, so I don't think you should care about it either." I'm pretty clear in this video what I'm talking about & why I'm talking about it - and those are surely my own decisions to make, right?
Slander - the action or crime of making a false spoken statement damaging to a person's reputation. Would you like the definition of gaslighting as well?
@@booknikYT There's a key word in that definition, but I don't care if you can spot it or not. The real question is: why are you watching this channel? Since your answer is almost 100% guaranteed to be a personal insult, we might as well get straight to it.
Hey now, you mean that ignoring an audiobook of one of 800 nearly identical, trope obsessed YA books playing at 2.5x speed while scrolling on your phone doesn't actually count as reading? How will they get some content to put between their ads now?
Hee - I just kinda wish they'd chosen as 'content' something they actually DO and ENJOY, but I guess that ship has sailed ...
I am trained, experienced and have real expertise in researching, writing, shooting, editing in such. I actually have no issue with a literary channel having really good production values and strong technical qualities. Poor audio recording, poor lighting, poor framing and poor editing can indeed exceed a viewer or listener's patience and make it less likely that they will be receptive to your message. I think our objection to these booktube channels is that they are flash with no substance. There is no message. Their production values and aesthetic are to distract you from a lack of substance. It doesn't matter how many takes and how many jump cuts they have. It never results in a coherent, reasonable thoughtful line of reasoning. I'm very dismissive of the "I likes what I likes. I dislikes what I dislikes" attitude. Nobody is unaware that readers have many different preferences. But if you can't intelligently tell a viewer why you like or dislike something or even demonstrate that you understood the author's intentions and intended audience then why share it at all? Why should anyone care if you like or dislike something? What value is that to potential readers trying to make decisions about they are considering to read? You are right. There is no content. They want to be influencers. And they'll dismiss the old gate keepers. They'll dismiss "the haters". There are intelligent, thoughtful, accomplished people who watch, listen to and read drivel, trash guilty pleasures. But they can articulate and defend the practice and even the merits of the works. If you can't do that then why bother? Oh because you want to be an influencer. You want to say "Look at me!"
The algorithm is no replacement for curation. Yeah, the western canon is under attack. There is a group of young people that wants to tear down everything and start all over again. But rather than examine what may or may not be wrong with the authors, publishers and ideas in the canon they perform book burning by another name. I love Charlie And The Chocolate Factory. And the author is problematic. No matter how many times they have modified the story of Wonka's workers it is problematic. Charlie's world that has some for of universal basic education, but lacking in a social safety net is troubling to me. A crazy old man who puts children through a series of trials for his own goals is somewhat troubling to me. But along the way I find out what I believe in and try to understand why I find these ideas disturbing or concerning. I'm forced to defend my world view or question my own values.
Tell me that a typical successful booktuber could write up their episode, stare into the camera and clearly and coherently put forward their ideas. They don't have an original thought in their heads. Their tea cups, bookshelves and accessories are all props. I didn't become less of a reader or less thoughtful after I passed thirty years of age. I didn't become less curious about the classics or new works as I aged. i didn't become less flexible or less adventurous in what I choose to read.
Steve donoghue talking about an article by theeee Bazpierce??i dont knowww how i missed tis videoo
We are not able to access tik tok in India ( I think )...am I missing something ?
I guess not ! :)
Hah! You're not missing anything!
Can you see these "shorts" they now have on youtube? It's like that. Very short videos with content that adds zero value to the internet.
Is that a new biography of Anthony Burgess? I am squinting trying to make it out but it's too blurry to see (the books lying around in the background are one of the minor pleasures of Steve's videos). I like it when Steve gets out his whacking stick and starts going after fellow BookTubers. I didn't realise Merphy Napier was in his bad books, I always thought she was too bland to warrant much negative criticism, but I haven't seen enough of her to have much of an opinion.
What if you spend so much time watching people talk about books that you don't have any time left to read? What about the weight-challended man (formerly referred to as 'fat slob') who has no time to go out and get in shape because he's too busy watching sports on TV? Or the hopeless romantic who doesn't have a personal life because they're too busy watching reality shows? I guess there are only so many hours in a day.
I keep hoping you and the demon smurf will team up for a video.
HAH! I literally can't imagine that! Even if he agreed to a Zoom chat, what on Earth could we talk about?
@@saintdonoghue It really is hard to imagine!
🧡
I’m sorry but how is Barry a boomer?? Isn’t he only like 30? I liked his article and thought it showed quite a few insightful and witty critiques.
Early twenties, I think. I really can't tell if Steve is being ironic or doesn't know..
Mainly because "Boomer" (always said with the maximum of condescension and disdain) has come to be shorthanded as "anybody even a few months older than I am right now"
But is targeting 13 y/o girls who enjoy young adult novels bad? Sure, the editing of some videos might be hard to follow at times but if it's the type of content that appeals to younger audiences and then inspires them to pick up a book, read it for themselves and become a reader or find a new favorite? That's got to be more beneficial than not. You call TheBookLeo out for ageism, but yet it feels like there's an air of pretension when you talk about 13 y/o girls in particular, as if they can't be 'real' readers just because they like watching videos with jumpcuts or cottagecore aesthetics.. I think you try to couch it by saying you value diverse content that captures all readers, but then calling the 'other' content mindless immediately makes it abundantly clear what you feel about their reading habits :/ I'm not sure if it was intentional or not and I understand you're just saying that content doesn't appeal to you, but it did feel a little judgy toward teen readers and people targeting them with their vids.
He isn't judging 13 year old readers. He's going after the grifters who prey on young people who don't know better. They are degrading reading into something false, giving their vulnerable audience a wrong impression of what reading is. If you know Steve, there's no one more in favour of 13 year olds who love to read. He just wants them to get good reading advice, which is not what he thinks those big booktubers give.
@@ThatReadingGuy28 I don’t know Steve, so I’ll take your word for it. I found this video because it was linked in an anti-Jack Edwards thread recently, and I agree that man is a fraud and only cares about making money off people. But I just don’t understand how someone can write off all content as mindless just because it uses flashy editing or someone sorts their bookshelf by color? I know plenty of people who enjoy sorting their shelves that way (who aren't posting videos or pictures online, it's just for them) but still find great joy in reading, and jumpcuts _do_ appeal to younger viewers, which makes it feel like the content made in a way they'll enjoy is being deemed 'wrong' here. (And the word “spaz” has been offensive for years, so I wasn’t expecting to hear it used so frequently in this video, by someone others recommended as a good voice on booktube?) I guess there’s a conversation happening I missed about what “right” reading is. My mom is a teacher, and she’d be very happy to see kids with books in hand, even if they initially picked it up because someone with fancy editing said it was “dark academia” or whatever. Just seems very gatekeeper-y to me, but maybe there’s something else happening I’m missing. I do agree grifters are bad, though, and that Jack Edwards is scamming people.
@@lucyromanoff654 I will say this, Steve is very much not a gatekeeper. He is the world's biggest hater of snobs. He reads what he wants and praises people who do the same. He makes it clear that there is no 'right' way to read.
@@ThatReadingGuy28 I believe you about him. To clarify, I have nothing against Steve - he seems to have a kind soul just in this one video I’ve seen, but I do think there are some instances of internal biases or something coming out here. Heck, at 10:52 he specifically says the editing bigger booktubers use is there to appeal to the 13 y/o girl “looking for her next online crush” which is incredibly reductive and gross, in my opinion. She could very well be watching top booktubers for book recs, not because she can only think with her feelings or has a crush? I’m just personally very tired of people assuming young women aren’t making conscious, thoughtful, purposeful choices. He then immediately calls those videos mindless content after establishing he thinks they're meant for teen girls. But teen girls are valid readers, too, even if they enjoy different things?
I’m not here to argue or to hate on him (again, I’m sure he’s lovely) or even to defend TheBookLeo, but I just personally believe making videos for younger readers isn’t inherently bad. (Even if it has midroll ads - Steve himself has patreon while TheBookLeo doesn't, so they're actually both monetizing content, just in different ways, at least from my perspective, so it's weird he writes her videos off as "nothing genuine to say" because of it.) And it seems like the stuff he points out here - dark academia, bookshelves organized by color, in particular - are things with an audience that presumably skews more towards women? So it seems like another instance of someone judging young women for finding joy in their hobbies or being “mindless” enough to enjoy the “aesthetic” content. I apologize if I’ve misread it & that’s not what’s happening, but it’s definitely what it appeared like from this video. I appreciate you replying and coming to his defense, though. And I definitely don't want this to come across as hate or anything, it was just my opinion!
Thank you for this video. I totally agree. Also, this helped me with my research for an article on BookTok.
I like Murphy🙃
I did try & watch her video regarding this article as well as other articles about similar issues..
Erm..does she pause for breath?..at anytime?..
Lots of her fans have been emailing me! Clearly, I need to watch more of her videos!
@@saintdonoghueVery friendly emails I'm sure..
If there's an app anyone could recommend that slows speech down from the speed of light to normal speed?..I will try her video again..
of the big channels she's the only one I'll watch occasionally if she's talking about a book/author I'm interested in.
@@25nomind her channel isn't aimed at old folks like me and that's fine, I have zero problems with anything she does, I just wish she would slow down and pause every now & then .
7:25
ruclips.net/video/dkjFrkXBgIk/видео.html. yea, i'd say he's a "real reader". LOL
Daniel Greene actually got me into reading back in 2018 because of his Wheel of Time videos, and his enthusiasm for those books was contagious enough to get me to buy a copy. I've since stuck to reading because I found myself really enjoying it.
However, unfortunately, I have to agree with you about how he is now. He used to be so genuine. Now he's just so obviously pretending to be this "chaotic" character with schizophrenic editing to appeal to an idea and I realized he was no longer making content for someone like me and that was pretty disappointing.
I mean, I guess I can't entirely blame him for wanting to monetize himself to make a living, but in the process he lost his character.
I will say his film discussion channel, titled matter-of-factly as "The Discussion", is more representative of what he used to be like
I’ve come to the realization just now that I don’t actually watch “booktube.” Apparently my favorite book related channels (you, Shawn D. Standfast, Michael K. Vaughan, Book Time With Elvis, Ann Novela, etc.) don’t count? Because I just searched “booktube” and I didn’t recognize anyone. At all. I’m fine with that.
Also I’ve never downloaded tictok because it’s worthless, unless you have the neural capacity and attention span of goldfish swimming in bong water.
Booktube and booktok seem to just be: YA roamnce or fantasy books ONLY club.