Introduction
For the current assignment, the chosen site of analysis is the channel “Johnny Harris” on YouTube. The research inquiry is the following: “What has been the nature and extent of the channel followers’ ability to decode and use provided content?” The interpretive research paradigm is the appropriate approach in this context because it enables an understanding of emotional stimuli and subjective analysis of followers’ actions. In other words, it can provide valuable insights into how viewers perceive and decode information from the channel based on their experiences and interactions. In this context, the primary theory compatible with interpretivism is phenomenology which concerns the direct interpretation of certain phenomena.
Ultimately, the current paper provides context for the research, establishes a paradigmatic focus, and discusses relevant theories to investigate how viewers decode information on social media platforms. This information is valuable for everyone because it offers insights into how people perceive online content, demonstrating the utmost significance of critical thinking in education.
Site Background
The proposed site for analysis is the channel “Johnny Harris” on YouTube, which currently has 3.09M subscribers. Its creator is Johnny Harris – a journalist and filmmaker who directed several documentary movies for Vox and The New York Times. The channel provides commentary on a large variety of topics, ranging from scientific-oriented theories to social and political areas of concern. As a result, some of the content is highly controversial, reaching nearly the same ratio of likes and dislikes, which is unusual for large YouTube channels.
Research Context
The examined channel is an appropriate site for analysis because of its large variety of topics and controversial discussions. It investigates most contemporary issues, with the latest being the Football/Soccer World Cup in Qatar and associated corruption, the Russian-Ukrainian War, and China’s political expansion (Johnny Harris 2022). These topics are fundamentally controversial due to differences in political affiliations. However, the channel’s content presents conflicting information even on social and scientific issues. For instance, the video “Why I Will NEVER Use the Metric System” has an approximately 65/35 ratio for likes and dislikes, demonstrating the viewers’ reluctance to accept the channel’s position (Johnny Harris 2022). Hence, the examined channel provides a fruitful environment for interpretive research. It demonstrates the differences in viewers’ perceptions and information-decoding behaviors depending on the topic, level of controversy, and relevance of videos.
Paradigmatic Focus
The chosen paradigmatic choice is interpretivism – a subjective framework that emphasizes viewers’ experiences and interactions to analyze provided information. The ontological focus generally concerns the fundamental questions of existence, such as “What is the nature of X?” (Deane). In this sense, it justifies the usage of interpretivism because the research inquiry attempts to investigate the nature of viewers’ information-decoding behaviors. The same principle is true for epistemological and axiological foci, which discuss the relationships between “the knower and what is known” and why this information is valuable for the research (Deane).
After all, the channel’s content is fundamentally socially engaging because, as research shows, social platforms are “by nature pluralistic and participatory” (Yang et al.). Hence, the epistemological focus is critical to understanding how viewers decode and interpret information in YouTube videos. Ultimately, interpretivism is an appropriate research paradigm to learn more about the proposed inquiry.
Methods
The primary methodology in this research paper is the examination of video characteristics and comments to determine viewers’ information-decoding abilities and behaviors. This approach draws inspiration from a similar research inquiry by Yang et al., who examined the factors that affect user engagement based on online science videos. The authors investigated such parameters as video length, social cues, the lecturer’s attitude, and the quality of infographics (Yang et al.). In the current paper, it is appropriate to expand the characteristics by adding the nature of the topic, the level of controversy (likes/dislikes ratio), and more attention to viewers’ comments. Since most videos on the channel are thought-provocative, there is a large number of viewers who share their experiences and perspectives on the videos.
This approach can be described as content analysis, which is compatible with interpretivism and phenomenology theory. However, it primarily emphasizes viewers’ comments instead of the videos to further analyze relevant experiences and interpretation mechanisms. For instance, in the socially controversial video “Why I Will NEVER Use the Metric System,” many viewers share their life experiences to defend the opposing perspective. Some of them provide examples from different countries, such as the UK, Australia, and Germany, claiming that the metric system is significantly more convenient. This information-decoding behavior aligns with the video, where Harris talks about the benefits of the metric system, although he personally cannot adopt it since he is cognitively used to the imperial system.
However, it is critical to note that some commentators have a different approach to information decoding and ignore the central concept of the video. Many viewers become defensive of the metric system and criticize Harris, although he is not being dismissive of the metric system’s benefits in the video. This information-decoding behavior could potentially arise from a clickbait title, “Why I will NEVER Use the Metric System,” that emphasizes the negative implications. As a result, a thorough analysis of video characteristics and viewers’ responses is the primary methodology to understand information-decoding behaviors. The same principle could be applied to other videos that concern politics and socially controversial topics.
Theories: Phenomenology
The primary theory that supports the methodology is phenomenology – a strategy that evaluates human perceptions and experiences to understand a specific phenomenon. Neubauer et al. (91) define it as “an approach to research that seeks to describe the essence of a phenomenon by exploring it from the perspective of those who have experienced it.” Additionally, Interpretive Phenomenological Analysis (IPA) is a more elaborated strategy appropriate for the current assignment (Neubauer et al. 91). Its primary contrast to other sub-theories is that the researcher “performs an active role in the interpretive process” (Neubauer et al. 91).
This theory is consistent with the proposed ontological and epistemological foci. The former is “Lived experience is an interpretive process situated in an individual’s lifeworld,” and the latter is “Observer is part of the world and not bias free” (Neubauer et al. 92). Both assumptions are applicable to the current research that deals with personal experiences.
As mentioned in the previous section, some viewers might fail to decode presented information for numerous reasons. For instance, people who started vigorously defending the metric system and ignored the video’s core message were unable to comprehend provided knowledge (“Why I Will Never”).
This finding aligns with the ontological and epistemological assumptions of IPA. Ontologically, it means that the viewers’ prior life experiences led them to believe that the metric system is significantly superior to imperial measurements. Epistemologically, these experiences result in a substantial bias that affects viewers’ judgments. Lastly, axiologically, this information is valuable for the researcher because it shows how experiences and beliefs affect information-decoding behaviors. In the video, the majority of commentators were able to comprehend the primary idea, but some people became overly defensive of the opinion that the metric system is better than the imperial one. This distinction resulted in a large number of dislikes (nearly 35%), making the video controversial and further affecting viewers’ judgments.
Scope and Limitations
Based on the analysis, it is appropriate to narrow down the intended scope of the study to include only controversial videos with a large number of dislikes. This content is suitable for investigating information-decoding behaviors since people are usually vocal about why they are not satisfied with the videos. Hence, it is possible to evaluate primary decoding patterns by analyzing video characteristics and viewers’ comments. The primary limitations are the substantial role of the researcher in IPA and YouTube algorithms. The former means that the researcher, similar to viewers, is always biased due to the topic and personal experiences.
Hence, it might be challenging to critically analyze the comments and eliminate all emotional bias. Consequently, YouTube algorithms generally promote content that is similar to what viewers have watched previously. As a result, most commentators in the videos generally have the same political and social perspectives on contemporary topics, eliminating the controversial aspect from the comments. Hence, it might be more challenging to find videos where a large number of viewers disagree with the channel’s position.
Conclusion
The current paper has presented an interpretivism research design to understand the nature of viewers’ information-decoding abilities and behaviors on the channel “Johnny Harris.” The ontological, epistemological, and axiological assumptions support the provided approach, showing that people’s comprehension is affected by personal experiences and biases. Lastly, the chosen methodology of content analysis and IPA can reveal valuable insights into the factors that influence viewers’ information-decoding behaviors.
Works Cited
Deane, Peter. “A Guide of Interdisciplinary Researchers: Adding Axiology Alongside Ontology and Epistemology.” Integration and Implementation Insights, 2018. Web.
“Johnny Harris.” YouTube. Web.
Neubauer, Brian, et al. “How Phenomenology Can Help Us Learn from the Experiences of Others.” Perspectives of Medical Education, vol. 8, 2019, pp. 90-97. Web.
“Why I Will NEVER Use the Metric System.” YouTube, uploaded by Johnny Harris. 2022. Web.
Yang, Shiyu, et al. “The Science of YouTube: What Factors Influence User Engagement with Online Science Videos?” PLoS One, vol. 17, no. 5, 2022. Web.