One of the perceived benefits of online media production is democratisation, whereby previous mechanisms of gatekeeping and exclusion can be circumvented with an internet connection. While a vibrant ecosystem of left-wing bloggers, podcasters and video essayists exists across YouTube, Twitch and TikTok (see issue 246), the mooted rise of an online left able to challenge the alt right has not met expectations.
Both offline and online, the world continues its dive into the abyss of fascism, with reactionary demagogues reaching audiences in the millions. Existing online is not enough. We must interrogate why the left has not made more headway on the internet – and take seriously the implications of that reality as left media producers continue to embrace online.
Personalities over politics
The rise of online content production reflects an individualisation of media, with team-led magazines and journals being supplanted by ‘name’ influencers. As a result, ideas are more likely to propagate on the strength of the personalities, not politics. This dynamic can lead to bad faith or fallible actors gaining prominence – and spreading misinformation, on the left as well as on the right.
For example, popular video essayist James Somerton was exposed by fellow YouTuber Harry ‘Hbomberguy’ Brewis as a serial plagiarist, whose posts were often riddled with factual inaccuracies. As another YouTuber, Todd in the Shadows, noted following Hbomerguy’s exposé, the platform’s video essayist ecosystem operates on the trust of viewers, with no editorial oversight holding influencers accountable. Had Somerton been working at an outlet with better editorial standards, he (hopefully) would have been stopped before reaching a large audience.
Somerton is in many ways the product of the system within which he operates. Online platforms are not neutral spaces but actively shape the material that is published on them in form, frequency and substance.
Instead of ‘debating’ the right’s talking points on their terms, left commentators and journalists must be bold, proactive and unapologetic
Publishing platforms also explicitly censor, demonetise and suppress content deemed ‘politically sensitive’ or flagged by poorly automated copyright detection systems. Aside from users creating workarounds to outwit algorithmic censors (for example, TikTokers’ ‘unalive’ as a stand-in for ‘death’), this impacts what subjects creators discuss and how. Last year, YouTube age restricted the video for Macklemore’s pro-Palestine song Hind’s Hall, effectively killing its reach. These systems are also inconsistent. While it supressed Hind’s Hall, YouTube kept up HarbuDarbu, a song by Israeli rap group Ness & Stilla, despite its openly genocidal lyrics and threats towards pro-Palestinian celebrities.
Hbomberguy has also noted the tension between online media production with socio-political goals and the function of said media as ‘content’. Content drives consumption and artistic, political or pedagogical intentions are subservient to that end. Media that is ‘easy’ to consume spreads quickest, ‘appeasing the algorithm’ with clickbait titles or ‘clipable’ moments preferred by TikTok and YouTube shorts. The turnover of material within these platforms also requires the constant production of content, which not only hinders more cerebral work but also places an enormous burden on individual creators to keep producing. If Owen Jones, for example, were to fall ill or take a break, his videos would be deprioritised by YouTube’s algorithm, effectively becoming forgotten by the platform over time.
In the platform economy, ideas, images and information are fed into technologies that devour them and return them as a commodity. The radical messaging of any media produced in these systems is recuperated into capitalism even as it is being produced. Both intellectually and in terms of mobilising people into offline action, our existing online ecosystems are potentially disastrous for the left – but we must not abandon them entirely.
Creators of the world, unite
Most online platforms are ideologically contested spaces with a substantial right-wing presence. Left-wing voices within them ensure the right cannot operate unimpeded: logging off actively surrenders ground. While deradicalising internet nazis is an unworkable strategy to win power, it’s imperative that people still finding their politics can stumble on F.D Signifier or Hasan Piker before the misogynist manosphere.
YouTuber Alice Cappelle encourages a radical rethink in how left media exists within the ‘online culture wars’, arguing against simply reacting to a discursive landscape dominated by rightwing grievances. Instead of ‘debating’ the right’s talking points on their terms – see Novara Media’s Aaron Bastani and Michael Walker palling around with GB News, and its apparent impact on their own hot takes – left commentators and journalists must be bold, proactive and unapologetic. This means establishing a degree of independence from social media platforms.
For the Leftist Cooks, their ecosystem of YouTube video essayists is an artistic scene predicated on networks of mutual collaboration and reciprocal communication with viewers. At the moment, such networks are loose and unorganised (and not entirely free of problematic behaviour), sharing knowledge and appearing in one another’s videos or podcasts. Still, these networks allow us to reimagine online media production as a less individualised endeavour, less beholden to the pressure of its platforms, and potentially more intentionally organised and politically active.
Though not a break from the platform economy, subscriber funded Patreon accounts offer creators more freedom of expression and the financial security to mitigate the need for constant content. Meanwhile, Nebula, a member-owned network free of YouTube’s algorithmic constraints, lets video essayists pursue more experimental creative projects. Such emergent platforms and collectives, working in tandem, are essential for sustaining a healthy and proactive left-wing media landscape.
