Credibility in Political Viral Video

It is no secret that YouTube exploded during the 2008 presidential election, becoming “the innovation” integrated into campaigning. We all remember the global warming melting snow man in the YouTube debate. We all laughed, but do we find that humorous approach a credible source for political communication?

You’re going to be surprised. Well, maybe.

In 2008, about 14 billion videos were watched on YouTube by U.S. Internet users. During the 2008 presidential campaign, voters rated watching YouTube political videos as one of the top three most popular online political activities. YouTube is a free video-sharing Web site and anyone, from politicians to experts to celebrities to ordinary citizens can both upload and watch videos. But to what degree are YouTube political videos influential of viewers’ perceptions, and to what degree does the source of the video make an impact? Similar to all other new forms of online communication, the effects of YouTube clips on consumers of political information, and the credibility of these messages have yet to be understood. Our study takes a step into that direction through a 3-cell post-test only experimental design that exposed participants to three YouTube clips about health care, each clip containing a different persuasive appeal (source/pathos, logic/logos, and emotion/ethos). Results revealed that the pathos/source appeal ranked as the most credible appeal followed by logos/logic and ethos/emotion, a somewhat promising finding that users resist being swayed by emotion or hard numbers and pay attention to message source. No relationship was found between the appeals and political information efficacy or the political cynicism of participants.

Citation: English, Kristin., Sweetser, Kaye D., & Ancu, Monica. (2010). YouTube-ification of political talk: An examination of persuasion appeals in viral video.  American Behavioral Scientist, forthcoming, winter/spring.

This is big news when it comes to credibility; contrary to what you might expect in such personal media, it is business as usual when it comes to credibility. People still recognize when someone has a personal agenda (even veiled in humor) and don’t find that basement video packed full of statistics credible when compared to an expert source.

The “man” still has the power when it comes to credibility, even in the people’s media.

Credible or not, I hope we don’t lose the melting snow men and the use of humor appeals in video sharing. More research has to be done, but I suspect a melting snow man is a tad more viral than a buttoned-up talking head.

CNN/YouTube Debate: Global Warming

Dr. Kaye Sweetser is an assistant professor of public relations at the University of Georgia. She blogs at http://kayesweetser.com, every once in a while.