“Proper Presentation, Appropriate Composition, and the Unknown”

Tito Mazzucchi

English-3, Air Stream

Larissa Pahomov


“Proper Presentation, Appropriate Composition, and the Unknown”

Why is the public, generally speaking, more connected and appealing to youtube videos that make a deliberate effort to appear unprofessional such as FilthyFrankTV, instead of videos that invest a lot of effort into making a professional appearance and include a high-production cost? Of course, this question is one which probably is not limited to a single area of study, but in researching on multiple fronts, it can be seen that the answer is also derivable from arguments that state the exact opposite. That a professional appearance is more rewarding than a slovenly one. What attracts the public the most is “the unknown”. “The unknown” in this case is: the unpredictable question of “what will happen next? Videos and memes that do not prioritize on professionality, invest much more time in developing, not necessarily quality of content, but rather in the way the content is delivered to the viewers. If an idea or a statement is properly presented, then it can be understood by a broader spectrum of people, and that creates more potential for community.

“The unknown” is ultimately the answer and final contributing cause to the viewer’s appeal, but this element is directly dependent on the presenter's deliverance. As a result, the videos that can present in the best way, can create the most mystery, and spark the best emotions from the public. The answer and the key to understanding public opinion, and visual-auditory reception can be found precisely in the previous statement: “...properly presented.” What qualifies as a proper presentation or as “the best way?” To what variables is a statement’s acceptance dependent on? The truth is that there are many factors to take into consideration, extending as far out as culture, all the way to the current mood of an audience member. There are many psychological branches that all touch on this a little bit, from singular conformity, to crowd psychology, the answer is a mix. For the sake of personal sanity, the following essay will be specific to only one case, otherwise the necessary study and time required to devise a clear answer would grow exponentially, and the research behind it would be given in “industrial quantities.” The focus will be on the two youtube channels: FilthyFrankTV versus RackaRacka. These two youtube channels have been selected because of their striking similarities and their evident contrast.

Both youtube channels were created in 2013 a few months apart, and both channels make an evident effort to produce a story that is of an apparent, poor quality. The striking thing about the two is that although the content in the videos takes on the form of a limited story, the interpretation can be vastly extensive. The two channels provide the closest matchup between the two strategies of delivery that are being discussed. There are enough subscribers present to give an accurate result (approximately 5 million person analysis for each side) and there is the most evident contrast in their adopted filmmaking techniques. As stated on his channel: “Filthy Frank is the embodiment of everything a person should not be. He is anti-PC, anti-social, and anti-couth. He behaves and reacts excessively to everything expressly to highlight the ridiculousness of racism, misogyny, legalism, injustice, ignorance and other social blights. He also sets an example that shows how easy it is in the social media for any zany material to gain traction/followers by simply sharing unsavoury opinions and joking about topics many find offensive. There is no denying that the show is terribly offensive, but this terrible offensiveness is a deliberate and unapologetic parody of the whole social media machine and a reflection of the human microcosm that that social media is. OR MAYBE IM JUST F*CKING RETARDED.” *Note that the last sentence in his description includes a preview of the vulgar personality which the character adopts.*

On the other hand, RackaRacka does not provide a description of the channel, so this is a general summary: RackaRacka is an embodiment of everything a goofy 6th grader would imagine from playing videogames and watching movies; where there is a lot of room for brutal humor, and the imagination is capable of painting a realistic picture. There is an excessive amount of production cost and time, unlike FilthyFrankTV, to realize these imaginations, but the characters, dialogue, and storyline of the videos do not make an attempt to portray a message or attack an issue, instead it showcases the playground of imagination that middle school children have during a comical phase of discovery in regards to “the brutality of the world.” In other words, both the channels provide a flattened version of a message, but one channel chooses to deliver this message in the most unprofessional way possible as to minimize the production value, whereas the other channel invests a lot of money in visual effects and equipment to maximize the production value.

Although the matchup was close, FilthyFrankTV ended up with half a million subscribers more than RackaRacka, supporting the thesis statement that the way which the content is delivered plays the deciding factor in the public mind. This can be said because the two channels are pretty much equivalent in every other category, providing the most potential for an accurate analysis. So now that it has been observed that the channel which deliberately presents their information with a shabby quality is more successful. It can be inspected further in the realm of audio and speech by taking into account a presentation given by Julian Treasure, an international speaker and sound expert.

In Julian’s presentation, he talks about the importance of speech and strategies that make someone more likely to be listened to. In addition he also mentions various things that he claims, make speech less effective. He states: “...What I’d like to suggest is that there are a number of habits we need to move away from… I’ve assembled for you a list of the 7 deadly sins of speaking…” He proceeds to list out the characteristics of bad speech and the interesting thing about it is that every single thing he mentioned to be a negative influence, was something which Filthy Frank would do. Now this does not just go for audio and speech, there are also many techniques which esteemed video creators mention to be a negative impact on viewer attention that Filthy Frank also does a lot of. So why is it that Filthy Frank, in doing the opposite of what is said to be an effective way of communicating, has success over RackaRacka and the majority of YouTube?

To answer the question, a connection can be drawn back to the previous argument in the thesis which states: “If an idea or a statement is properly presented, then it can be understood by a broader spectrum of people.”’ Overall, there are many who go to YouTube for entertainment and as a method of relaxing after having tended to their daily environment. It’s no surprise that after a full day of formal greetings and self control inside office space and school buildings, people want to take a break. What is appropriate to the situation about what Filthy Frank does is that he speaks in a language that can be understood, it’s plain, and just simply out there. This ties back to the fact that the audience likes “the unknown.” Taking on the stance which he has, Filthy Frank unlocks the most potential for mystery and therefore curiosity because his viewers never know how nastily he may react to something or what new disgusting adventure he might undertake. While it is true that there is a lot of importance in communicating in a professional way, what is more important is that you are communicating in the most understandable way. That is what determines the subjective qualifications of a proper presentation or appropriate composition.

Works Cited

TVFilthyFrank. "TVFilthyFrank." YouTube. YouTube, n.d. Web. 22 Jan. 2017.

<https://www.youtube.com/user/TVFilthyFrank> (Filthy Frank’s youtube channel)

How you found this source, and why you think it's credible: I found this source via my good friend Harrison Wellner back in the 8th grade. This source is credible because it is also something I will be drawing direct connections too and it is the most resourceful sourced source if what we are talking about is internet filth.

How it influenced your thinking: Filthy Frank actually inspired me in many ways, and this draws a direct connection back to the argument about how the negative videos actually create a reciprocal effect on the viewer, making them more inclined to improve. This channel also makes me reflect on the world today with its abrupt political statements.

BobbyBurnsOfficial. "The Secret Genius of Filthy Frank." YouTube. YouTube, 02 Dec. 2016. Web. 22 Jan. 2017.

<https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lcQP9O2_NFk> (example person who has a similar stance on the issue)

How you found this source, and why you think it's credible: I found this source while I was browsing the internet to try and look for the reason to why channels like Filthy Frank are rising to power. It’s a person’s 2Fer essay read outloud but for Filthy Frank instead of Ainsley Harriott.

How it influenced your thinking: It gives me a good perspective on other people’s theories about what the causes and reasons are for the content being more successful. It helps me get a better understanding of the situation and it helped shape my thesis statement.

"Personality Presenters." Google Books. N.p., n.d. Web. 22 Jan. 2017.

<https://books.google.com/books?id=HyAfDAAAQBAJ&pg=PA17&lpg=PA17&dq=study+on+the+connection+between+the+viewers+and+the+presenter&source=bl&ots=bnW8D7roD2&sig=YyG5YcdKPDdDukAw4e179Xp4qZY&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjv5aW20dbRAhXr1IMKHVtjD3IQ6AEIHDAA#v=onepage&q=study%20on%20the%20connection%20between%20the%20viewers%20and%20the%20presenter&f=false> (book section that speaks about broadcasting presentation and connection between viewers and speakers.)

BobbyBurnsOfficial. "The Youtube Happiness Deception." YouTube. YouTube, 12 Jan. 2017. Web. 22 Jan. 2017.

<https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z2L0y79PRrg> (example of a channel who used to present content in a reserved/semi-professional way and then decided to change the way he talked and communicate in a more realistic way with his audience without a filter and then because of that proceeded to become the most subscribed youtube channel.)

How you found this source, and why you think it's credible: This source comes from the #1 most subscribed YouTuber and is a personal account of their opinion in regards to false advertising. It was then reworked by another YouTuber/filmmaker  that tries to make the general public more conscious of “Youtube politics” as a secondary upload schematic.

How it influenced your thinking: I immediately drew connections to other realms outside that of YouTube in and out of the internet. This video will definitely be one that I will go back to when I am working on the analytical segment of my arguments.

TEDtalksDirector. "How to Speak so That People Want to Listen | Julian Treasure."YouTube. YouTube, 27 June 2014. Web. 22 Jan. 2017.

<https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eIho2S0ZahI> (video that talks about the importance of speech art)

Argument: People want a vacation from this.