NASes are pricey but provide a level of robustness that a beefy external hard drive or cloud storage just don’t provide. In a NAS you can configure drives in...
Watching videos is like an order of magnitude easier than reading for large swathes of the population. Fully 18% of the US adult population is functionally illiterate – they can pass a reading test, but their reading level is so low it hardly matters. These folks can still watch YouTube/Dystopian Vine (sorry, TikTok).
Also, this much is just my own speculation, but A/V media is a lot easier to push people’s emotional buttons with because it’s much, much faster and easier to consume content via video and we’re likely hardwired to pay more attention to audio/visual stimuli than abstract imagery in our heads. A video+audio track of an explosion is always going to hit people harder than a careful description of the same explosion, and if people expect it to be easier and to provide a larger emotional impact, they’re more likely to go for the thing that makes them feel something more easily.
We are all governed by dopamine more than we like to admit.
because it’s much, much faster and easier to consume content via video
That totally depends on the content. Using your example, yes, a video of an explosion is going be much more efficient than a block of text about the same explosion. But for something like this, I find it MUCH slower to try to glean the relevant information from a video than from an article. An article can be skimmed easily so I only have to focus on the parts that I care about. Skimming a video, on the other hand, is a pain. Also, if the content is a step-by-step how-to, the video might be OK as long as I can follow along in real time. However, if I have to keep pausing and going back to rewatch a section, then an article is going to be easier to work with.
Watching videos is like an order of magnitude easier than reading for large swathes of the population. Fully 18% of the US adult population is functionally illiterate – they can pass a reading test, but their reading level is so low it hardly matters. These folks can still watch YouTube/Dystopian Vine (sorry, TikTok).
Also, this much is just my own speculation, but A/V media is a lot easier to push people’s emotional buttons with because it’s much, much faster and easier to consume content via video and we’re likely hardwired to pay more attention to audio/visual stimuli than abstract imagery in our heads. A video+audio track of an explosion is always going to hit people harder than a careful description of the same explosion, and if people expect it to be easier and to provide a larger emotional impact, they’re more likely to go for the thing that makes them feel something more easily.
We are all governed by dopamine more than we like to admit.
That totally depends on the content. Using your example, yes, a video of an explosion is going be much more efficient than a block of text about the same explosion. But for something like this, I find it MUCH slower to try to glean the relevant information from a video than from an article. An article can be skimmed easily so I only have to focus on the parts that I care about. Skimming a video, on the other hand, is a pain. Also, if the content is a step-by-step how-to, the video might be OK as long as I can follow along in real time. However, if I have to keep pausing and going back to rewatch a section, then an article is going to be easier to work with.