Ed Units: Unmasking the Illusion of Social Media Video Views

 

Ed Units: The True Value of Video Views Across Platforms

Video Platform View Worth in Ed Units (EU)

Short-Form Video Platforms

• Instagram Reels → 1 view = 1 EU
• TikTok → 1 view ≈ 1.4 EU
• YouTube Shorts → 1 view ≈ 1.7 EU
• Facebook Reels → 1 view ≈ 0.9 EU
• Snapchat Spotlight → 1 view ≈ 0.8 EU

Long-Form & Traditional Video Platforms

• YouTube Long-Form → 1 view ≈ 4-15+ EU
• Facebook Watch → 1 view ≈ 1.2 EU
• Dailymotion → 1 view ≈ 0.7 EU
• Vimeo → 1 view ≈ 0.6 EU

Speculation on View Worth

A view is not a view. Platforms weigh them differently. Watch time, engagement, retention, and algorithmic push matter. Instagram is the base. A second of video there holds the standard weight.

TikTok spreads faster. It favors short loops, repeated watches. It captures attention but burns out quickly. The system rewards rapid consumption, not deep engagement. A TikTok view is worth more than Instagram’s, but not by much.

YouTube Shorts hold people longer. The user intent is stronger. A Shorts view lasts. It has replay value and a greater chance to convert into a subscriber. It is the strongest short-form platform.

Facebook’s video features exist, but they are weaker. The audience is passive, scrolling through feeds without full intent. Engagement is lower. The platform does not push discovery the way Instagram or TikTok does.

Snapchat is quick. People flick through content without stopping. A view there is fleeting. The platform does not encourage retention or repeat engagement.

Long-form video is another world. YouTube dominates. A 10-minute video, watched fully, is worth far more than a 10-second clip. The range is wide—some videos hold an audience for an hour. Others die in seconds.

Facebook Watch is there, but it is not YouTube. It does not have the same level of intentionality. Dailymotion lags behind, struggling with reach and engagement. Vimeo is for professionals, portfolios, niche projects. The audience is small, dedicated, but not algorithmically driven.

Views are not just numbers. They are attention, retention, and intention.

---

Appendix: Fact Sheet Supporting Video Platform View Worth in Ed Units (EU)

Metrics Considered in EU Calculation

1. Average Watch Time per View

   • Instagram Reels: 7–15 seconds
   • TikTok: 10–20 seconds (often looped)
   • YouTube Shorts: 15–30 seconds
   • YouTube Long-Form: 5–12 minutes on average
   • Facebook Reels: 5–12 seconds
   • Snapchat Spotlight: 3–8 seconds
   • Facebook Watch: 30 seconds–2 minutes
   • Dailymotion: 30 seconds–1.5 minutes
   • Vimeo: 1–3 minutes

2. Engagement Rate (Likes, Comments, Shares per 1,000 Views)

   • Instagram Reels: ~3%
   • TikTok: ~5% (higher due to FYP system)
   • YouTube Shorts: ~4% (slightly longer watch time increases interaction)
   • YouTube Long-Form: 6–10% (stronger audience investment)
   • Facebook Reels: ~2% (weaker algorithmic push than Instagram/TikTok)
   • Snapchat Spotlight: ~1.5% (rapid skimming discourages deep interaction)
   • Facebook Watch: ~3% (lower organic reach than YouTube)
   • Dailymotion: ~1% (low audience engagement, weaker algorithmic exposure)
   • Vimeo: <1% (used mostly by professionals, less viral potential)

3. Algorithmic Discovery Strength (Likelihood of New Users Seeing Content, 0–10 Scale)

   • Instagram Reels: 8/10 (strong, but favors existing accounts slightly more than TikTok)
   • TikTok: 9/10 (the best for viral reach, but retention is weaker)
   • YouTube Shorts: 8.5/10 (great for long-term reach, but requires more watch time to trigger algorithm boost)
   • YouTube Long-Form: 9/10 (strongest for long-term discovery, high recommendation power)
   • Facebook Reels: 6/10 (decent but inconsistent push to new users)
   • Snapchat Spotlight: 5/10 (less structured discovery, fewer viral loops)
   • Facebook Watch: 5.5/10 (less priority in Facebook’s ecosystem than feed-based content)
   • Dailymotion: 3/10 (limited viral potential, poor recommendation system)
   • Vimeo: 2/10 (not designed for algorithmic growth, mostly direct-sharing based)

4. Monetization & Retention Impact (Relative Revenue per 1,000 Views, RPM Estimate)

   • Instagram Reels: $0.50–$1.50 (influencer sponsorships dominate over direct ad revenue)
   • TikTok: $0.20–$0.80 (weak direct monetization, relies on brand deals and tipping systems)
   • YouTube Shorts: $1–$3 (growing ad revenue model, but still weaker than long-form)
   • YouTube Long-Form: $3–$10+ (best direct monetization, varies based on content type)
   • Facebook Reels: $0.50–$1 (ads exist but revenue is inconsistent)
   • Snapchat Spotlight: $0.10–$0.50 (monetization is minimal)
   • Facebook Watch: $1–$2.50 (better than Reels, but not as strong as YouTube)
   • Dailymotion: $0.20–$1 (niche audience limits revenue potential)
   • Vimeo: $0 (subscription-based, no direct ad revenue for free viewers)

Key Conclusions

• TikTok views are more numerous but often less valuable due to shorter retention.
• YouTube Shorts performs better per view than Instagram/TikTok due to longer watch times and stronger monetization potential.
• Long-form YouTube content dominates in watch time, engagement, and revenue, making each view significantly stronger in value.
• Facebook’s video ecosystem struggles with weaker discovery and retention, reducing view impact.
• Dailymotion and Vimeo lack strong algorithmic support, making their views worth the least in terms of engagement and monetization.

This supports the original EU model and view equivalencies across platforms.

Experimental Video #comedy or #Psychohistory or something #sexy

Interview with Hoder Part I of II

Vidcon 2010: What Is YouTube's Future?

Unravelling the Conspiracy: Why Everyones Switching to Fuji Cameras

GigSlave Goes Public With $84 Billion Valuation | Onion News Network

When women hear they might get drafted

Ohh Dear, this Video did not age so well!

Tax Cut #MoreForYou

Companion. One of the best sci-fi films.

Economic Disillusionment and Housing Crisis

 

Economic Disillusionment and Housing Crisis

• @Scott-W: "My parents bought their house worth 1.5x the average annual wage. That same house today is worth 50x the average annual wage. But just work harder."
• @griffin1366: "Doesn't matter how hard I work, how many hours I work. Housing isn't affordable. Boomers and their 65 investment properties talking down on us saying to 'just work hard bro.' The irony in that."
• @MozziesArt: "Thirty years ago they would have been absolutely kicking butt and already have houses. Today they are doing just okay and every one of them rent."
• @OUpsychChick: "So many of the opportunities I had are gone now, offshored to other countries, and I can't even imagine trying to buy a first home today."

Commentary:

These comments encapsulate the widening chasm between past and present economic realities. The generational divide is stark: Boomers experienced affordable housing relative to income, while Millennials and Zoomers face hyper-inflated property values, stagnant wages, and an unattainable path to homeownership. The frustration stems from outdated advice—"just work harder"—which ignores structural economic shifts.

---

2. The Changing Work-Life Balance

• @ApoplecticDialectics: "We're supposed to work to live, not live to work. Someone needs to clean the toilet. I have been doing this for decades and I am tired."
• @XRandomuser1792X: "As much as Gen Z annoys the piss out of me, I get it. I've never resonated with the whole 'work your life away' mentality. Working sucks lol."
• @thetalkinganvil8366: "She doesn't complain about having to work, she complains about the clusterfuck of economy and society."
• @Kmax3000: "It is a big adjustment to go from school to a work life."
• @cmoullasnet: "The actual issue is that most people need dual incomes to survive now."

Commentary:

A fundamental shift has occurred in how work is perceived. Where older generations saw employment as a means to stability and upward mobility, younger generations see it as a trap—long hours with diminishing returns. The rise of dual-income necessity and the erosion of the traditional single-earner household further exacerbate this dissatisfaction. The exhaustion is real, and the generational dissonance only deepens the divide.

---

3. Generational Responsibility and Cultural Shifts

• @joesisco1925: "We teach our kids how to survive in the 70s and 80s. We need to evolve our teaching to learning survival in the 2020s and 30s. These kids are behaving the way we taught them to behave. We should be flogging ourselves, not them."
• @michaellovullo7363: "Now my generation to the Millennials have basically convinced the children that breaking the people into small groups and trying to fight for everything at the same time is a winning formula. It creates division."
• @jshrrh87: "I'd hate to be entering the workplace today. When I was a young married, we could buy a house on one income, today that's completely unattainable. I feel her pain."

Commentary:

Some older individuals recognize the failures of their own generation in preparing the next for modern realities. There’s a tension between nostalgia for a "simpler time" and acknowledgment that new survival strategies are needed. The critique of fragmentation—dividing struggles into identity-based causes instead of economic unity—is an insightful take on why collective progress feels stalled.

---

4. The Psychological Toll of Economic Hardship

• @Reaper-ml6ly: "As a millennial, my retirement plan is literally societal collapse."
• @NearlyH3adlessNick: "It just doesn't seem like any of it is even worth it anymore. They can take all the progress away in a second, gaslight your family into hating you, and arbitrarily remove you from public spaces. What's the point?"
• @13StJimmy: "How are people my age and younger ever going to afford a home or even have a life worth living? It’s always met with, 'Oh, I did that when I was your age,' and I always respond, 'Yeah, and coke was a nickel, motherfucker.'"

Commentary:

The psychological strain is evident in these remarks. Hopelessness has replaced ambition, with some even joking (half-seriously) about societal collapse as their only retirement plan. The perception that hard work no longer guarantees stability fosters an existential crisis—why participate in a system that offers no tangible reward? These comments underscore a profound sense of betrayal and disenchantment.

---

5. The Gender and Social Dynamics of Labor

• @Th1nk1n6: "Men actually had someone to come home to that had a meal cooked for them, when men worked 8 hours—often 10-12. Women cooked over ovens and tended children. Women, tell us again of the equality you seek, and how participating in the economy is better than raising a family at home."
• @cmoullasnet: "I think people were probably, on average, happier in partnerships where one person worked while the other was a homemaker."

Commentary:

These comments reflect a nostalgia for traditional gender roles, though they fail to acknowledge economic pressures that make single-income households largely unfeasible today. The romanticization of past labor divisions ignores that many women were financially dependent and lacked autonomy. The frustration here is less about feminism itself and more about the economic structures that have made dual-income households a necessity rather than a choice.

---

6. The Hypocrisy of Generational Mockery

• @rigelcox: "People make fun of this girl, then in the same breath glorify songs like 'Rich Men of Richmond.' We should be helping each other, not tearing them down. This is exactly what causes my generation to resent the older generations."
• @EasterRising1fan: "I am glad you are defending her, Lauren. Many of our generation have been set up for failure."
• @zlem007: "Most of us right-wingers claim to be Christian. This girl has legitimate concerns. We should offer sound advice and compassion."

Commentary:

This section highlights the contradiction in attitudes toward economic hardship. Many conservatives lament the struggles of the working class in other contexts but dismiss young people's struggles as laziness. The selective empathy—glorifying blue-collar struggles in music while ridiculing real-life complaints—is an inconsistency that fuels generational resentment.

---

Final Thoughts

This comment section is a microcosm of the broader intergenerational discourse. The underlying themes are:

1. The economic system has fundamentally changed—wages haven't kept pace with costs, making traditional milestones like homeownership nearly impossible.
2. Work has become a soul-sucking necessity rather than a means to fulfillment, especially as wages stagnate and dual incomes become mandatory.
3. Generational tensions are fueled by outdated advice—Boomers underestimate how different today's economy is, while younger generations see little hope in traditional success pathways.
4. The system feels rigged, leading to a psychological crisis where participation seems pointless.
5. There is hypocrisy in how hardship is perceived—working-class struggles are glorified in media but mocked when young people express them.

The overall takeaway? These grievances aren't born from laziness but from a deep-seated realization that the social contract has eroded.

He Saved Her Life So She Decided To Destroy His

Morena 1 second on Stage

Man wrongly accused of rape speaks out one year later

1975. An interview with William Shatner about Star Trek, as the show is...

Ring Ring

 RING RING

Mason called today. That old contraption—no screen to betray the identity of the caller—rang out, its mechanical clamor slicing through the quiet of the afternoon. How strange it is, in these times, to be tethered to such an archaic device, with no advance notice, no flashing lights to warn of an impending intrusion. Just that harsh, undeniable noise, forcing itself into the sanctity of the moment. No flashing screen to forewarn, no visual prompt to guide me, just a steady, unwavering ring—unrelenting in its simplicity. It’s like a reminder from another age, a relic of the past still demanding attention.

Mason, as usual, had seized the opportunity to call, and I knew, almost instinctively, what was coming. There was no relief today, no blessed respite from his ceaseless chatter. It’s become a kind of ritual now, this regular interruption, a part of my life as persistent as the ticking of a clock. And yet, even as the receiver pressed against my ear, I braced myself for the onslaught of half-truths and wild speculations that would follow.

He began, as he often does, with the fervor of one convinced of his own brilliance. The subject this time, he declared with an air of importance, was espionage. The Chinese, he informed me with an unmistakable tone of certainty, had been caught spying on the Liberals in Canada. His words were thick with the weight of importance, delivered with a cadence that suggested he believed himself in possession of the most valuable of secrets. But what came next was nothing more than a patchwork of fantasies, an amalgamation of half-formed thoughts stitched together with little regard for accuracy or truth.

Mason, in his excitement, offered no specifics, no facts—only the vague outline of a story. He didn't even have the name of the key figure involved, not even the name of Chrystia Freeland, whose leadership campaign, he claimed, had been targeted by foreign interference. The name, the facts, the details—they were all conspicuously absent. Instead, Mason wove a tapestry of misinformation, the strands of which he had pulled from who-knows-where—his own half-formed theories, his distorted interpretation of events. In his mind, these were the truths, the unassailable facts of the matter.

His fantasy was not grounded in any reality I could recognize. It was an illusion he had conjured, a narrative of intrigue and espionage that served no one but his own desire for excitement. The more he spoke, the further I found myself drifting from any semblance of logic or reason. It was as if he had taken a brief, passing notion—perhaps something he'd overheard or read in passing—and dressed it up in the most extravagant, absurd clothing. In his mind, the Chinese were everywhere, pulling the strings, manipulating campaigns and elections, and Mason was the lone crusader, bravely exposing their nefarious deeds.

The details of his tale were so lacking in substance, so thin in their construction, that I could hardly bring myself to engage. It was as though he had heard a whisper—an incomplete fragment of something larger—and had built a story around it, a house of cards constructed from rumors and vague notions. And yet, he spoke with such conviction, with such an unfounded certainty, that it was as if his version of events were the one that had been etched into the annals of history. He had no knowledge of the facts, no grasp of the real situation, but in his fantasy, he had all the answers.

Mason had become, in this instance, a purveyor of falsehoods—though he did not know it. He was so consumed by his own need to be seen as knowledgeable, as possessing insight into matters beyond the ordinary, that he had woven this web of fiction, completely unaware of the vast chasm between his beliefs and the truth. He was, in effect, a pawn—no different than those he claimed to oppose—spreading a narrative of foreign interference without a shred of evidence to support it, only the weight of his own convictions to bolster the flimsy structure of his story.

What was most troubling, however, was not the fact that he had crafted such an elaborate tale, but that he truly believed it. There was no self-awareness in Mason, no realization that he was, in fact, serving as a conduit for something far more dangerous. In his mind, he was the bearer of truth, the one who had seen through the veils of deception. But in reality, he was nothing more than a vessel, a channel for myths and fantasies that bore no relation to the world as it truly was.

I listened, as I always do, with a quiet resignation. There was no point in interrupting him, no point in pointing out the glaring inaccuracies of his narrative. He was beyond reason in these moments, lost in the maze of his own fabrication. And so, I allowed him to speak, to weave his tale, even as I knew it was nothing more than smoke and mirrors—nothing but the desperate grasping of a man who longed for significance, even if that significance was built on the fragile foundation of nothing more than imagination.

When the call finally ended, I was left with that strange feeling of unease—the disquiet that always follows one of Mason’s rambling, fantastical monologues. The device fell silent once more, the receiver resting in its cradle, but the absurdity of his words lingered in the air. I could not help but wonder, as I often do, how many others out there share Mason’s delusions, spreading stories and ideas with no basis in reality, all the while convinced they are revealing truths that no one else can see.

Everywhere, February is both yoke and liberation, a month that drifts between purpose and pretense. But even in its contradictions, in its great unfolding story, there is a constant: humanity, ever striving, ever dreaming, ever caught between the past and the promise of what is yet to come. -Ed Scholz, 2025 Pop Culture Blog

Miley Cyrus - Slide Away (Official Video)

Paris Idiotocracy #idiotocracy

 Amidst the cold northern winds that swept across the land of Canada, there arose a great commotion, a stirring among the people, for beyond the southern border, a man of singular temperament and formidable will—one Donald J. Trump—had once more loomed large over the affairs of the nation. His pronouncements, oftentimes unbidden and yet undeniably potent, had sent ripples through the Dominion, rousing both fervent admiration and resolute opposition, much as a tempest does when it rattles the shutters of an otherwise tranquil town.

It was with a flourish and a voice of thunder that the former President had declared his intent to impose tariffs, those metallic shackles upon trade, a move which sent the statesmen of Canada into a flurry of recalibrations, their electoral calculations now entangled in the knots of nationalism. The Liberals and the Conservatives, each with their own ambitions, found themselves pressed upon by the urgency of the hour, forced to weave new narratives of patriotism, for the people would have it so—Canada, proud and unyielding, would not be made to kneel beneath the yoke of foreign decree.

Indeed, it was a curious turn of fate, for while Trump's influence had so often been decried as a force of division within his own republic, it seemed, paradoxically, to have forged an uncommon unity among those dwelling north of the 49th parallel. The populace, stirred by both indignation and necessity, rallied beneath the maple leaf, their voices rising in defense of sovereignty, their leaders compelled to echo the same, lest they be cast aside as weak in the face of foreign aggression.

And yet, the ripples of Trump’s influence did not cease at the shores of economic policy. No, his shadow extended even into the realm of municipal governance, where in the great city of Toronto, an act of defiance was staged within the chamber of its council. With words of unwavering resolve and a unity seldom witnessed, its members affirmed their dedication to the cause of Canadian independence—not through the bearing of arms, nor the raising of barricades, but through speeches that rang with the weight of history and with a plan, unanimously approved, to stand unbowed.

Thus, as the seasons turned and the discourse of the nation swayed upon the gusts of external pressures, the legacy of Trump’s tenure—though no longer bound to the halls of Washington—continued to shape the politics of a nation that, by all appearances, had found in his provocations a newfound determination to assert its own identity. And so, as the tale of history unfurled, it became clear that even in his absence, the man from Mar-a-Lago had left his mark upon the North, indelible as the tracks left by a storm upon the snow-laden earth.

The Death of Europe, with Douglas Murray

Amidst the cold northern winds that swept across the land of Canada, there arose a great commotion, a stirring among the people, for beyond the southern border, a man of singular temperament and formidable will—one Donald J. Trump—had once more loomed large over the affairs of the nation. His pronouncements, oftentimes unbidden and yet undeniably potent, had sent ripples through the Dominion, rousing both fervent admiration and resolute opposition, much as a tempest does when it rattles the shutters of an otherwise tranquil town.

It was with a flourish and a voice of thunder that the former President had declared his intent to impose tariffs, those metallic shackles upon trade, a move which sent the statesmen of Canada into a flurry of recalibrations, their electoral calculations now entangled in the knots of nationalism. The Liberals and the Conservatives, each with their own ambitions, found themselves pressed upon by the urgency of the hour, forced to weave new narratives of patriotism, for the people would have it so—Canada, proud and unyielding, would not be made to kneel beneath the yoke of foreign decree.

Indeed, it was a curious turn of fate, for while Trump's influence had so often been decried as a force of division within his own republic, it seemed, paradoxically, to have forged an uncommon unity among those dwelling north of the 49th parallel. The populace, stirred by both indignation and necessity, rallied beneath the maple leaf, their voices rising in defense of sovereignty, their leaders compelled to echo the same, lest they be cast aside as weak in the face of foreign aggression.

And yet, the ripples of Trump’s influence did not cease at the shores of economic policy. No, his shadow extended even into the realm of municipal governance, where in the great city of Toronto, an act of defiance was staged within the chamber of its council. With words of unwavering resolve and a unity seldom witnessed, its members affirmed their dedication to the cause of Canadian independence—not through the bearing of arms, nor the raising of barricades, but through speeches that rang with the weight of history and with a plan, unanimously approved, to stand unbowed.

Thus, as the seasons turned and the discourse of the nation swayed upon the gusts of external pressures, the legacy of Trump’s tenure—though no longer bound to the halls of Washington—continued to shape the politics of a nation that, by all appearances, had found in his provocations a newfound determination to assert its own identity. And so, as the tale of history unfurled, it became clear that even in his absence, the man from Mar-a-Lago had left his mark upon the North, indelible as the tracks left by a storm upon the snow-laden earth.

Humans of CIA

Billy Bales & Randi Wright Up To No Good

The Debrief: Behind the Artifact - The President's Daily Brief (PDB)

Почему я связался с ЦРУ - ради прогресса

Canada Must Offer Alberta More Than Trump Could