[makeitdouble]

You do you, but I'd chime in on why it's not recommended: any simple answer to that question will just be "there's a long history and international context that led to a complex situation".

That's the perfect TL;DW but I don't think it helps you much.

20 min is short for such a vague question, and you can watch at 2+x the speed if info density is so paramount.

To note it still glosses over an incredible amount of critical things, it's just not a topic that can be shortened that much for anyone actually caring about understanding it.

[nottorp]

> 20 min is short for such a vague question, and you can watch at 2+x the speed if info density is so paramount.

Interesting how a lot of defenders just assume delivering the same info in writing is not feasible.

Has the skill to read/write become a competitive advantage again, like in the medieval ages when 0.1% of the population knew how to do it?

[makeitdouble]

To me it comes down to how the creator decided to publish their piece.

If there is no specific accessibility need, getting it in the original format on the chose platform would be my primary choice. In particular it's not a time sensitive subject and watch it later sounds easy enough.

You seem to put reading/writing on a pedestal, but as you point out we're not in the medieval ages anymore, nobody should feel superior because they read it instead of watching it.

[nottorp]

> You seem to put reading/writing on a pedestal

No, I put my personal time on a pedestal. Videos are slow, and I'd rather spend my life in other ways.

[Xelbair]

No, i just value my time and ability to search information.

plus i'm unable to consume media in the 'background'.