Video essays have transformed online discourse. This is how universities can adapt.

I learned what a video essay was a few weeks ago. This fact surprises me, since for years I considered them to be my favourite genre of YouTube video.

As an alternative to the short-form and AI-generated slop that is unavoidable when browsing social media, a well-made video essay offers creative and thought-provoking analysis of any topic imaginable, whether it’s art, politics, history, philosophy, science, or often several of these topics at once. For better or for worse, video essays by Hbomberguy and Zoe Bee were my first introduction to leftist politics, and have played a significant role in shaping my beliefs. It is with these experiences in mind that I noticed a discrepancy between the definitions of what a video essay is within academic institutions and what video essays mean to me and many others – which is unfortunate, because video essays provide an excellent opportunity for academic tools to become more readily accessible to the public and for higher-quality social media content to thrive.

An example of this discrepancy was when I saw on the syllabus of one of my political science courses that there was an assignment titled “Video Essay.” I was ready to fire up OpenShot and get scripting for roughly twenty seconds until I looked at the instructions, which specified not to do any video editing, including citing the sources on-screen – horrible advice for any aspiring video essayist! 

Not only is citing sources on screen and in the description standard practice to avoid plagiarism, but an effective video essay should have the form match the content using tools specific to the medium, such as editing in a way which makes it engaging and working… well, as a video essay! Not a podcast, not a regular essay, and not what my project suggested, which is closer to a recording of a speech. 

As it turns out, however, my project’s definition would not be as far off as I thought.

According to Columbia University’s School of International and Public Affairs, the Schulich School of Business, and several other postsecondary institutions that have adopted the term in applications, a video essay is an unedited and conversational 90-second recording either introducing oneself or answering a randomly assigned question. Joke’s on me for assuming that my niche interests would be recognized on an academic level. Case closed?

However, I am not alone in my assumption. Since 2017, the British Film Institute’s magazine Sight and Sound has released an annual list of the best video essays selected by a panel of over 30 scholars, journalists, and filmmakers. Entries on the lists range from the directly filmic, such as Alison Peirse’s “Knit One, Stab Two,” reflecting the genre’s origins as a visual method of film criticism. Other video essays, like Jacob Geller’s “Fantasies of Nuremberg,” are closer to my project’s instructions (save for the length), with background music and occasional clips and images interspersed between on-camera narration of history and politics. Neither variety requires paying for any complicated editing software. 

This low barrier to entry can also be seen in where video essays are published. YouTube is the primary platform for video essays, where some have garnered tens of millions of views. Alternative avenues include Vimeo, as well as subscription services for creators wishing to monetize their work, such as Patreon and the emerging creator-run streaming service Nebula. 

It may be this “digital DIY” not mediated by academic institutions that prevents video essays from being fully embraced as legitimate methods of academic scholarship, despite often being extensions of the work of various academics. Common arguments against video essays in universities typically involve some judgement about the difficulty of making a video essay when compared to writing one. Another factor may be the vastly different production techniques and methods of perception that come with the differing mediums, and the misplaced value judgments therein for what criticism is. There is some truth to this. As stated previously, the two mediums involve significantly different production processes, and the standards for what makes one or the other effective involve different criteria. Be it for reasons of practicality or elitism, the fears of video essays replacing academic writing can safely be assuaged. 

But video essays do not need to become commonplace assignments for them to earn the institutional respect they deserve. The emerging industry offers vast potential for scholarly inquiry in the fields of Book and Media Studies, Digital Humanities, and Cinema Studies. Beyond analysis, courses on the production of video essays can be created in these areas, perhaps even cross-listed with other disciplines in the arts and sciences. While academic assignments may prefer more traditional methods for presenting research findings, video essays can provide an accompaniment to traditional research posters. Encouraging students to get involved in the video-essay-making process at the university level can help bridge the divide between universities and the general public: research findings can be communicated to the public via video essays, and video-essay-making tools can be a way for non-academics to engage in research and writing. Today, the internet is many people’s first introduction to a variety of issues, so why not make this introduction as well-researched, thoughtfully made, and engaging as possible?