Both were too simplistic and presented a singular view as fact instead of presenting a more nuanced and balanced view on the issues discussed.
The refugee video presented a simplified, in American terms "liberal" view on it, and at least indirectly insulted people who disagreed with accepting so many refugees or at least the system that was in place to take refugees. It presented Syrian refugees as being of economic benefit to the countries recieving them, which isn't entirely untrue, but is a rather debateable claim, and missed that a lot of the refugees and migrants involved in the crisis were not even Syrian. It didn't properly address people having geniune concerns over the potential security risks posed by the crisis (e.g. increased crime that inevitably comes with large numbers of desperate people, especially young men, and terrorists posing as refugees and so on were a real threat) and brushed these fears away with studies that weren't necessarily really applicable (some of the studies were about Mexican immigrants in USA etc.). It also didn't really discuss the political problem with so many refugees wanting to go into specific countries and the way the system hadn't properly been set up to handle a crisis of this scale and for example distribute the refugees in a more fair manner among EU countries.
Basically, it was too political and divisive and didn't try to first explain the subject objectively and only then give the opinion of the Kurzgesagt team, but instead went directly to preaching a specific political view without honestly discussing the complexity of the issue and reasons why people might have concerns about everyhing related to it. This ultimately meant that it failed in both things it tried to do: It didn't properly inform people, and it didn't come off as proper and understanding argumentation, but instead felt like a propaganda piece that obviously isn't going to convince the people who were not already in favour of accepting refugees.
The addiction video was based on a view on addiction that isn't necessarily shared by the majority of experts when it comes to addiction and painted a too simplistic picture based on only one source. It wasn't that it was wrong, it is that it presented as fact a view on an issue where there wasn't a proper scientific consensus, and didn't present the alternative views or in general emphasize the many unknowns and problems left with understanding addiction.
Thankfully, they took the videos down, and although they won't make a new video on the refugee crisis (it is over, after all), they said they will make a more nuanced video on addiction at some point.
Edit: Rewatching the video, I would like to add that there were plenty of far-right claims and even outright propaganda going around at the time, so it wasn't surprising that people wanted to strike back at these claims with a passionate video. The video does also at least briefly mention many of the issues (it does in fact also make a mention of the refugee system putting too much pressure on specific countries), and the claims made in the video are generally correct or at least entirely not wrong based on data at the time (e.g. economic impact of Syrian refugees wasn't really something you could know at the time). The main failure is more in the tone of the video, the lack of disclaimer that it is more an opinion video instead of a science video, and other features that made it just throw more fuel into the fire instead of trying to present a level-headed and understanding overview of the issue, and why Kurzgesagt sides with a certain approach. In my opinion, the main factual failure of the video was that it focused on Syrian refugees and seemingly didn't understand that not all of the migrants were refugees, and not all of the refugees were Syrian.
If I remember correctly about what I thought at the time, I was myself fully in favour of helping Syrian refugees, but was very worried about the problems that the non-Syrian migrants could possibly cause and desperately hoped there would be more nuanced discussion about the problems that may come with these migrants, but felt that the public discussion largely put all the migrants together and was either fully in favour of letting everyone in with no deeper oversight, or completely opposed to letting anyone in and in favour of a complete shut-down. I saw the video at the time and felt that while I agreed about helping refugees, the video probably wouldn't be helpful because I could immediately see many ways that the video would easily be picked apart by people who don't already agree with it.
Aarros292 karma
Both were too simplistic and presented a singular view as fact instead of presenting a more nuanced and balanced view on the issues discussed.
The refugee video presented a simplified, in American terms "liberal" view on it, and at least indirectly insulted people who disagreed with accepting so many refugees or at least the system that was in place to take refugees. It presented Syrian refugees as being of economic benefit to the countries recieving them, which isn't entirely untrue, but is a rather debateable claim, and missed that a lot of the refugees and migrants involved in the crisis were not even Syrian. It didn't properly address people having geniune concerns over the potential security risks posed by the crisis (e.g. increased crime that inevitably comes with large numbers of desperate people, especially young men, and terrorists posing as refugees and so on were a real threat) and brushed these fears away with studies that weren't necessarily really applicable (some of the studies were about Mexican immigrants in USA etc.). It also didn't really discuss the political problem with so many refugees wanting to go into specific countries and the way the system hadn't properly been set up to handle a crisis of this scale and for example distribute the refugees in a more fair manner among EU countries.
Basically, it was too political and divisive and didn't try to first explain the subject objectively and only then give the opinion of the Kurzgesagt team, but instead went directly to preaching a specific political view without honestly discussing the complexity of the issue and reasons why people might have concerns about everyhing related to it. This ultimately meant that it failed in both things it tried to do: It didn't properly inform people, and it didn't come off as proper and understanding argumentation, but instead felt like a propaganda piece that obviously isn't going to convince the people who were not already in favour of accepting refugees.
The addiction video was based on a view on addiction that isn't necessarily shared by the majority of experts when it comes to addiction and painted a too simplistic picture based on only one source. It wasn't that it was wrong, it is that it presented as fact a view on an issue where there wasn't a proper scientific consensus, and didn't present the alternative views or in general emphasize the many unknowns and problems left with understanding addiction.
Thankfully, they took the videos down, and although they won't make a new video on the refugee crisis (it is over, after all), they said they will make a more nuanced video on addiction at some point.
Edit: Rewatching the video, I would like to add that there were plenty of far-right claims and even outright propaganda going around at the time, so it wasn't surprising that people wanted to strike back at these claims with a passionate video. The video does also at least briefly mention many of the issues (it does in fact also make a mention of the refugee system putting too much pressure on specific countries), and the claims made in the video are generally correct or at least entirely not wrong based on data at the time (e.g. economic impact of Syrian refugees wasn't really something you could know at the time). The main failure is more in the tone of the video, the lack of disclaimer that it is more an opinion video instead of a science video, and other features that made it just throw more fuel into the fire instead of trying to present a level-headed and understanding overview of the issue, and why Kurzgesagt sides with a certain approach. In my opinion, the main factual failure of the video was that it focused on Syrian refugees and seemingly didn't understand that not all of the migrants were refugees, and not all of the refugees were Syrian.
If I remember correctly about what I thought at the time, I was myself fully in favour of helping Syrian refugees, but was very worried about the problems that the non-Syrian migrants could possibly cause and desperately hoped there would be more nuanced discussion about the problems that may come with these migrants, but felt that the public discussion largely put all the migrants together and was either fully in favour of letting everyone in with no deeper oversight, or completely opposed to letting anyone in and in favour of a complete shut-down. I saw the video at the time and felt that while I agreed about helping refugees, the video probably wouldn't be helpful because I could immediately see many ways that the video would easily be picked apart by people who don't already agree with it.
View HistoryShare Link