Alright, so I’m less lost on how to go about working on this field guide collection of resources… but I’m not sure how helpful I’m gonna be regarding finding said resources to use regarding the darkness of the internet.
I can barely find my glasses in the morning. And half the time they’re on my face.
BUT. We’ll give it the ol’ grad school try.
One thing that really stuck out to me this week was the “eating spiders in your sleep” conspiracy video by LEMMiNO. Not only was the content interesting, but I found the format in which it was presented, along with the humor that went with it, refreshing and worth a listen.
I feel like there are a lot of content creators on the internet who strive to put forth content in this type of format, and it leads me to wonder about its relation to believability. And aside from that, how absurd can the humor get without crossing a line to being annoying?
I suppose this post is more about wondering what people find attractive in a post on the internet. What makes it go viral, and does the possibility of no truth being to it hinder that attractiveness?
WhEW I don’t think that made ANY sense. But I’ll just drop a few informative/humorous content creators I happen to watch and sEE WHERE IT GOES FROM THERE. Plus I’ll put a rough, Very Subjective, Darkness Level (DL) rating for now.
Mr. Sunday Movies (nerd reviews and such) (DL 6)
Game Theory (sigh. i don’t watch MatPat anymore but he’s worth mentioning I GUESS) (DL 4)
World of Dave (cultural differences and satire) (DL 9)
bill wurtz (history of japan guy. yes, that guy.) (DL 8)
Honestly, I feel like I’d like to go into each and like… I dunno… dissect what makes them popular on the internet? And what grabs viewers’ attention? And also how factual or subjective they are (not saying one is better than the other, though).
If………. any of that……… is even relevant to the field guide……………
Maybe a part of me just wants to promote my faves.
Welp, I tried.