The history of humanity is divided into the time before YouTube and the time after.

Considering how important social (collective) learning is in the evolution of civilization, this statement is not too far-fetched. Without platforms like YouTube (or exactly YouTube), the vast body of knowledge and skills interconnected with human life could not have been produced, transformed, and spread so rapidly. Conflicts around the world would have been silenced, and hidden masters in the corners of the globe would have had to be content being the kings of the alley. We live in an era where anyone who can only learn how to use YouTube can establish their own broadcasting station. If the achievements of a collective are accumulated and transformed, then YouTube can indeed be called the engine of the evolution of civilization.

Nevertheless, YouTube is still a hot potato. In the recent controversy over the YouTuber Jjuyang, who had over ten million subscribers, one side of the YouTube ecosystem is a lawless zone that can leave people speechless. From channels that seem to offer benevolence by lining up politicians to those like 'Amugae TV' that excite the Taegeukgi Troop, the fandom politics of YouTubers are further polarizing the digital tribal society. In contrast, legacy media has subtly lowered the flag of pursuing public value and turned towards mimicking popular YouTube channels. YouTube is a platform specialized for fandom. Given this situation, YouTube becomes an even more challenging presence for existing intellectuals who are concerned about the knowledge ecosystem.

However, the real reason they are reluctant to engage with YouTube is slightly more fundamental. Media theorist Marshall McLuhan, in his seminal work 'Understanding Media,' argued through the famous proposition that "the medium is the message" that the medium (media) itself is as important as the content. This means that the content and reception of the message change according to the characteristics of the medium. In this context, the reason why authoritative intellectuals in the existing knowledge ecosystem are hesitant about YouTube is clear.

First, YouTube prefers short and visual content, unlike traditional academic papers or books. YouTube content is different in essence from academic content, which is important for in-depth analysis and logic. For instance, while a paper often consists of dozens of pages filled with complex theories and data, YouTube videos must convey the core message within a few minutes to several tens of minutes.

Second, YouTube is an open platform accessible to anyone. This is an advantage but also creates problems that blur the boundary between expertise and non-expertise. During this time, intellectuals experience frustration as their expertise is undermined. For example, even if a neuroscientist provides accurate information on YouTube, one cannot prevent the consumption of incorrect neuroscience information from an adjacent non-expert that is automatically recommended. If the channel featuring that non-expert has significantly more subscribers, the problem becomes even more serious. Knowledge producers become frustrated, and consumers become misinformed.

Moreover, producing YouTube content requires technical knowledge and experience in video shooting, editing, and marketing, which can be a significant burden for intellectuals focused on academic research and teaching. Additionally, maintaining a YouTube channel is not easy, as continuous production and management of content require substantial time and effort.

Nevertheless, intellectuals have reached a point where they must actively utilize YouTube. Even domestically, the recent monthly active users (MAU) of YouTube are 46,246,846, surpassing KakaoTalk and Naver to rank first. According to last year's Oxford Economics report, 94% of Koreans said they gather information and knowledge through YouTube in 2021. Now, whether we like it or not, we live in the age of YouTube. The voices of intellectuals ignoring this reality can only grow quieter. To exaggerate a bit, intellectuals who merely criticize the YouTube ecosystem as garbage or turn away from it are those who have no intention of meeting 90% of our citizens.

Let’s remember when the internet first debuted. The most visited webpage was a porn site. People said the internet world was destined to become mere garbage. But how did it turn out? Perhaps even now, porn sites still hold the largest scale. However, the internet has transformed every aspect of our lives, changed the grammar of business, created new values, and proved the truth of the proposition "the medium is the message." YouTube will likely trace a similar trajectory. We hope that the true masters of the offline knowledge ecosystem will migrate to the world of YouTube and thrive. Unless we can immediately construct the knowledge platform post-YouTube, we must cultivate a healthier knowledge ecosystem on top of the piles of fake news, conspiracy theories, fandom politics, and trash from comment battalions that are accumulating in this space.