Meme Encyclopedia
Media
Editorials
More

Popular right now

Throwing Car Batteries Into the Ocean

Throwing Car Batteries Into the Ocean

Adam Downer

Adam Downer • 6 years ago

Italian Brainrot / AI Italian Animals image and meme examples.

Italian Brainrot Animals

Mateus Lima

Mateus Lima • about a month ago

Mr. Cool Ice

Mr. Cool Ice

Matt Schimkowitz

Matt Schimkowitz • 6 years ago

100 Men vs 1 Gorilla viral debate meme and image examples.

100 Men vs. 1 Gorilla

Owen Carry

Owen Carry • 4 days ago

Tung Tung Tung Sahur meme image examples.

Tung Tung Tung Sahur

Sakshi Rakshale

Sakshi Rakshale • about a month ago

Know Your Meme is the property of Literally Media ©2024 Literally Media. All Rights Reserved.

Kurzgesagt – In a Nutshell - Images (14 results)

Sorted By:

Great news | /r/dankmemes

Loneliness lowers your life expectancy as much as smoking a pack of cigerettes a day Finally, some good f------ news
Loneliness lowers your life expectancy as much as smoking a pack of cigerettes a day Finally, some good f------ news
Loneliness lowers your life expectancy as much as smoking a pack of cigerettes a day Finally, some good f------ news

Kurzgesagt – In a Nutshell
/r/dankmemes reddit

America when the Japanese won't surrender: America when the Japanese still won't surrender:

America when the Japanese won't surrender: NUKE A CITY 8:56 grandayy What if We Nuke a City? 473K views 4 hours ago America when the Japanese still won't surrender: grandayy There is another
America when the Japanese won't surrender: NUKE A CITY 8:56 grandayy What if We Nuke a City? 473K views 4 hours ago America when the Japanese still won't surrender: grandayy There is another
America when the Japanese won't surrender: NUKE A CITY 8:56 grandayy What if We Nuke a City? 473K views 4 hours ago America when the Japanese still won't surrender: grandayy There is another

Kurzgesagt – In a Nutshell
america japan nuke city kurzgesagt japanese yoda there is another

America when the Japanese won't surrender:

America when the Japanese won't surrender:
America when the Japanese won't surrender:
America when the Japanese won't surrender:

Kurzgesagt – In a Nutshell
america japan nuke city kurzgesagt

This new Kurzgesagt vid is very informative

Dr Grandayy @grandayy Following This new Kurzgesagt vid is very informative What If We Detonated All Nuclear Bombs at Once? 460K views Kurzgesagt - In... SUBSCRIBED N 8.3M subscribers 7:32 AM-31 Mar 2019 1,279 Retweets 20,101 Likes
Dr Grandayy @grandayy Following This new Kurzgesagt vid is very informative What If We Detonated All Nuclear Bombs at Once? 460K views Kurzgesagt - In... SUBSCRIBED N 8.3M subscribers 7:32 AM-31 Mar 2019 1,279 Retweets 20,101 Likes
Dr Grandayy @grandayy Following This new Kurzgesagt vid is very informative What If We Detonated All Nuclear Bombs at Once? 460K views Kurzgesagt - In... SUBSCRIBED N 8.3M subscribers 7:32 AM-31 Mar 2019 1,279 Retweets 20,101 Likes

Kurzgesagt – In a Nutshell
kurzgesagt grandayy bomb video minecraft

AMA Question

PhoebusElpollo 340 points23 hours ago Did you read Hari's book? Џ Reply Give Award Share Report Save kurz-gesagt .. 431 points . 23 hours ago Of course I did. After reading it, I very enthusiastically emailed him and asked him to collaborate on the video. Џ Reply Give Award Share Report Save Tom tomgags 238 points . 23 hours ago Just out of curiosity, did he collaborate on the video? Reply Give Award Share Report Save kurz_gesagt453 points 22 hours ago Yeah, he wrote most of the script. Which is the reason why it has such a big overlap with his Ted Talk. Reply Give Award Share Report Save
PhoebusElpollo 340 points23 hours ago Did you read Hari's book? Џ Reply Give Award Share Report Save kurz-gesagt .. 431 points . 23 hours ago Of course I did. After reading it, I very enthusiastically emailed him and asked him to collaborate on the video. Џ Reply Give Award Share Report Save Tom tomgags 238 points . 23 hours ago Just out of curiosity, did he collaborate on the video? Reply Give Award Share Report Save kurz_gesagt453 points 22 hours ago Yeah, he wrote most of the script. Which is the reason why it has such a big overlap with his Ted Talk. Reply Give Award Share Report Save
PhoebusElpollo 340 points23 hours ago Did you read Hari's book? Џ Reply Give Award Share Report Save kurz-gesagt .. 431 points . 23 hours ago Of course I did. After reading it, I very enthusiastically emailed him and asked him to collaborate on the video. Џ Reply Give Award Share Report Save Tom tomgags 238 points . 23 hours ago Just out of curiosity, did he collaborate on the video? Reply Give Award Share Report Save kurz_gesagt453 points 22 hours ago Yeah, he wrote most of the script. Which is the reason why it has such a big overlap with his Ted Talk. Reply Give Award Share Report Save

Kurzgesagt – In a Nutshell
hari book read ted talk

I Was Busy

Coffee Break @coffeebreak YT св Replying to @The TierZoo I was busy releasing a new video and then got busy. I had no way of knowing I should be in a huge rush. I was about to get back with him when March 3rd hit. 12:19 PM-12 Mar 2019
Coffee Break @coffeebreak YT св Replying to @The TierZoo I was busy releasing a new video and then got busy. I had no way of knowing I should be in a huge rush. I was about to get back with him when March 3rd hit. 12:19 PM-12 Mar 2019
Coffee Break @coffeebreak YT св Replying to @The TierZoo I was busy releasing a new video and then got busy. I had no way of knowing I should be in a huge rush. I was about to get back with him when March 3rd hit. 12:19 PM-12 Mar 2019

Kurzgesagt – In a Nutshell
response reply emails

Sum Up The Criticism

Coffee Break @coffeebreak_YT ce l'll sum up the criticism against me for completeness, l've been criticised for: Not paraphrasing his "video is good enough" correctly. Not emailing him back fast enough Not seeking a private solution with him via email after the first debacle 2:55 PM-12 Mar 2019
Coffee Break @coffeebreak_YT ce l'll sum up the criticism against me for completeness, l've been criticised for: Not paraphrasing his "video is good enough" correctly. Not emailing him back fast enough Not seeking a private solution with him via email after the first debacle 2:55 PM-12 Mar 2019
Coffee Break @coffeebreak_YT ce l'll sum up the criticism against me for completeness, l've been criticised for: Not paraphrasing his "video is good enough" correctly. Not emailing him back fast enough Not seeking a private solution with him via email after the first debacle 2:55 PM-12 Mar 2019

Kurzgesagt – In a Nutshell
criticizing emailing paraphrasing

Final Email

Feb 8, 2019, 9:00 PM FindStephe to Philipp Oh and as to the time-frame of the video, itll be 3-6 weeks before the series comes out, but the research phase has to finish before anything else can continue, so while I don't want to rush you, earlier is better for me! Thanks, Stephen Philipp Dettmer Feb 21, 2019, 7:48 AM to me Hahaha. Ill use sunscreen. So the earliest I could do is by the end of next week. To make sure you can send me a few questions beforehand. I should be able to answer them some time next week.
Feb 8, 2019, 9:00 PM FindStephe to Philipp Oh and as to the time-frame of the video, itll be 3-6 weeks before the series comes out, but the research phase has to finish before anything else can continue, so while I don't want to rush you, earlier is better for me! Thanks, Stephen Philipp Dettmer Feb 21, 2019, 7:48 AM to me Hahaha. Ill use sunscreen. So the earliest I could do is by the end of next week. To make sure you can send me a few questions beforehand. I should be able to answer them some time next week.
Feb 8, 2019, 9:00 PM FindStephe to Philipp Oh and as to the time-frame of the video, itll be 3-6 weeks before the series comes out, but the research phase has to finish before anything else can continue, so while I don't want to rush you, earlier is better for me! Thanks, Stephen Philipp Dettmer Feb 21, 2019, 7:48 AM to me Hahaha. Ill use sunscreen. So the earliest I could do is by the end of next week. To make sure you can send me a few questions beforehand. I should be able to answer them some time next week.

Kurzgesagt – In a Nutshell
hurry research series reply

Email Four

FindStephen to Philipp Feb 8, 2019, 8:28 PM So the series is on how ideas spread. I got the idea when I read several articles saying "sex doesn't sell". it was all based around a scientific article, that, upon further examination says nothing of the kind. So I wondered... if this idea has spread so much that isn't rooted in anything, what is it about this narrative that is compelling? So i read around and found the idea that great theorists are great not because what they say is true, but rather that it is interesting: which he defines as something that subverts your expectation. So ideas like "sex doesn't sell" is fundamentally interesting to people, because it implies that reality is different than we've seen it up till now, whether or not the piece is actually true. I wondered what other ideas maybe are interesting but not true upon further examination. That's when I found Hari's TED talk, and later the addiction video, which I find fascinating, but also reductive. I have to say though, quite a bit has transpired since we talked, and after getting in touch with Hari, I don't think he got things "wrong" in the strict sense of the word, as he simplified for TED to the point that the plot was kind of lost. his TED talk tangentially suggests that the physical side of addiction isn't really real, but addiction is rather due to disconnection, (the addiction piece in a nutshell is similar.) In his book CTS though, he basically says its a mix and acknowledges that no simple explanation can capture the complexities of addiction, which I think is correct. So at this point, this part of the series is focused on how the shortform "popularizer" talks encourage simplification. This is great when the topics actually have simple answers that can be answered in 10 minutes, because ideas can spread widely. But this can create problems when the topics that are covered are incredibly complex (like addiction). This is part of the reason I wanted to reach out to Hari and you. By talking to Hari, my story has actually changed considerably. I've gone from thinking that he misrepresented the evidence to thinking that he was caught up in writing a compelling narrative fit for a 10-20 min format. He's pointed me to his wider writing which is much less extreme and shows a more nuanced view of addiction As to how the series will look: Tentatively- the video titles are Interesting - Why Sex Doesn't Sell (putting murray davis theory of interesting here) Neat - Why TED talks won't make you smart (simplification idea goes here, and several reductive TED talks will be discussed) ??? - I haven't figured out the final part yet. I think it will be a reflection on our genre, maybe discussing the death of expertise by Tom Nichols. I'm happy to let you review the quotes that I use, if you want to have a quick call.
FindStephen to Philipp Feb 8, 2019, 8:28 PM So the series is on how ideas spread. I got the idea when I read several articles saying "sex doesn't sell". it was all based around a scientific article, that, upon further examination says nothing of the kind. So I wondered... if this idea has spread so much that isn't rooted in anything, what is it about this narrative that is compelling? So i read around and found the idea that great theorists are great not because what they say is true, but rather that it is interesting: which he defines as something that subverts your expectation. So ideas like "sex doesn't sell" is fundamentally interesting to people, because it implies that reality is different than we've seen it up till now, whether or not the piece is actually true. I wondered what other ideas maybe are interesting but not true upon further examination. That's when I found Hari's TED talk, and later the addiction video, which I find fascinating, but also reductive. I have to say though, quite a bit has transpired since we talked, and after getting in touch with Hari, I don't think he got things "wrong" in the strict sense of the word, as he simplified for TED to the point that the plot was kind of lost. his TED talk tangentially suggests that the physical side of addiction isn't really real, but addiction is rather due to disconnection, (the addiction piece in a nutshell is similar.) In his book CTS though, he basically says its a mix and acknowledges that no simple explanation can capture the complexities of addiction, which I think is correct. So at this point, this part of the series is focused on how the shortform "popularizer" talks encourage simplification. This is great when the topics actually have simple answers that can be answered in 10 minutes, because ideas can spread widely. But this can create problems when the topics that are covered are incredibly complex (like addiction). This is part of the reason I wanted to reach out to Hari and you. By talking to Hari, my story has actually changed considerably. I've gone from thinking that he misrepresented the evidence to thinking that he was caught up in writing a compelling narrative fit for a 10-20 min format. He's pointed me to his wider writing which is much less extreme and shows a more nuanced view of addiction As to how the series will look: Tentatively- the video titles are Interesting - Why Sex Doesn't Sell (putting murray davis theory of interesting here) Neat - Why TED talks won't make you smart (simplification idea goes here, and several reductive TED talks will be discussed) ??? - I haven't figured out the final part yet. I think it will be a reflection on our genre, maybe discussing the death of expertise by Tom Nichols. I'm happy to let you review the quotes that I use, if you want to have a quick call.
FindStephen to Philipp Feb 8, 2019, 8:28 PM So the series is on how ideas spread. I got the idea when I read several articles saying "sex doesn't sell". it was all based around a scientific article, that, upon further examination says nothing of the kind. So I wondered... if this idea has spread so much that isn't rooted in anything, what is it about this narrative that is compelling? So i read around and found the idea that great theorists are great not because what they say is true, but rather that it is interesting: which he defines as something that subverts your expectation. So ideas like "sex doesn't sell" is fundamentally interesting to people, because it implies that reality is different than we've seen it up till now, whether or not the piece is actually true. I wondered what other ideas maybe are interesting but not true upon further examination. That's when I found Hari's TED talk, and later the addiction video, which I find fascinating, but also reductive. I have to say though, quite a bit has transpired since we talked, and after getting in touch with Hari, I don't think he got things "wrong" in the strict sense of the word, as he simplified for TED to the point that the plot was kind of lost. his TED talk tangentially suggests that the physical side of addiction isn't really real, but addiction is rather due to disconnection, (the addiction piece in a nutshell is similar.) In his book CTS though, he basically says its a mix and acknowledges that no simple explanation can capture the complexities of addiction, which I think is correct. So at this point, this part of the series is focused on how the shortform "popularizer" talks encourage simplification. This is great when the topics actually have simple answers that can be answered in 10 minutes, because ideas can spread widely. But this can create problems when the topics that are covered are incredibly complex (like addiction). This is part of the reason I wanted to reach out to Hari and you. By talking to Hari, my story has actually changed considerably. I've gone from thinking that he misrepresented the evidence to thinking that he was caught up in writing a compelling narrative fit for a 10-20 min format. He's pointed me to his wider writing which is much less extreme and shows a more nuanced view of addiction As to how the series will look: Tentatively- the video titles are Interesting - Why Sex Doesn't Sell (putting murray davis theory of interesting here) Neat - Why TED talks won't make you smart (simplification idea goes here, and several reductive TED talks will be discussed) ??? - I haven't figured out the final part yet. I think it will be a reflection on our genre, maybe discussing the death of expertise by Tom Nichols. I'm happy to let you review the quotes that I use, if you want to have a quick call.

Kurzgesagt – In a Nutshell
sex doesn't sell ted talk

And He Has Cancer?!

Philipp Dettmer Feb 7, 2019, 10:25 AM to me Hm, well I'm not entirely convinced yet to be honest. But if you give me a few more details, I could imagine having a call and offering a bit of a background for the process of how the video came to being and our contact with Hari. There was a point when I confronted him about the critique. But at this point I don't feel comfortable to talk in more detail about it. It would also be good to know if you plan to let me review my quotes, like journalists do. I'm about to start traveling to Educon and Vidcon and then to Mexico to recover from the chemo. So if you are not in a rush and if you disperse my concerns that you are doing an unfair video, we can talk Also you mentioned you want to do a series? Could you tell me a little more about that?
Philipp Dettmer Feb 7, 2019, 10:25 AM to me Hm, well I'm not entirely convinced yet to be honest. But if you give me a few more details, I could imagine having a call and offering a bit of a background for the process of how the video came to being and our contact with Hari. There was a point when I confronted him about the critique. But at this point I don't feel comfortable to talk in more detail about it. It would also be good to know if you plan to let me review my quotes, like journalists do. I'm about to start traveling to Educon and Vidcon and then to Mexico to recover from the chemo. So if you are not in a rush and if you disperse my concerns that you are doing an unfair video, we can talk Also you mentioned you want to do a series? Could you tell me a little more about that?
Philipp Dettmer Feb 7, 2019, 10:25 AM to me Hm, well I'm not entirely convinced yet to be honest. But if you give me a few more details, I could imagine having a call and offering a bit of a background for the process of how the video came to being and our contact with Hari. There was a point when I confronted him about the critique. But at this point I don't feel comfortable to talk in more detail about it. It would also be good to know if you plan to let me review my quotes, like journalists do. I'm about to start traveling to Educon and Vidcon and then to Mexico to recover from the chemo. So if you are not in a rush and if you disperse my concerns that you are doing an unfair video, we can talk Also you mentioned you want to do a series? Could you tell me a little more about that?

Kurzgesagt – In a Nutshell
chemo hari series meet

Email Three

FindStephen to Philipp Feb 2, 2019, 3:24 PM Thank you for mentioning that, I will not quote you I'll clarify what I meant by "not making a gotcha piece". A gotcha piece is a "call-out" for views. It's a deliberate framing that doesn't present a full picture or seek to understand context. My intent is not to "call-out" anyone for it's own sake but examine our genre critically. Thats why I'm reaching out. I think this is a story worth telling because it shows the blind-spot (for lack of a better word) of our genre of "pop-explainers". We can convince massive audiences of narratives and stories about the world that, while well-meaning, can sometimes be overly-simplistic or wrong about the evidence However, while telling that story, I'm aware I'll have to bring up examples of this, so I'm reaching out to the parties involved in order to better understand the process that led to these events and ask if you have any reflections on your influence, videos, etc. That way i can give a fuller picture to the audience. So I'm reaching out to give you the opportunity to tell your side of the story if you so choose. Also its worth re-stating that this is a series that isn't so much about kurzgesagt, as it is about pop-explainers, a genre in which include myself. The conclusions I draw will, to the best of my ability, reflect that idea, that it's systemic. By the way, I'm sympathetic of leaving up videos that people enjoy, I've done that myself on my own channel before; sometimes it isn't obvious what the best course of action is with a video Note: I reached out to Johann Hari as well in order to give him the chance to respond to what I see as oversights in his research and clarify But to be clear, there are problems with Hari's work, not just looking back from 2019, but holes in his research that were easily available at the time. An easy example of this might be his New York Times review: "By not looking at the research of Mate, Alexander and Marks through a critical lens, Hari makes it easier for critics to dismiss them outright. That is a shame: While each man pushes his conclusions to extremes unsupported by data, their underlying message that harm reduction is the most rational and humane approach to drug use and abuse is, in fact, backed by copious research Hari might not be passing off other people's work as his own anymore, but he still seems to be looking for quick fixes."That's just one example, but it will do to service the point for now. all this said, I apologize if this is a bit frustrating for you. I enjoy your work and don't want to sully the way you feel about our relationship. I reached out precisely because I want to give you the chance to have a voice in a telling of a story that involves your channel. I will respect whatever route you decide to go Thanks Stephen
FindStephen to Philipp Feb 2, 2019, 3:24 PM Thank you for mentioning that, I will not quote you I'll clarify what I meant by "not making a gotcha piece". A gotcha piece is a "call-out" for views. It's a deliberate framing that doesn't present a full picture or seek to understand context. My intent is not to "call-out" anyone for it's own sake but examine our genre critically. Thats why I'm reaching out. I think this is a story worth telling because it shows the blind-spot (for lack of a better word) of our genre of "pop-explainers". We can convince massive audiences of narratives and stories about the world that, while well-meaning, can sometimes be overly-simplistic or wrong about the evidence However, while telling that story, I'm aware I'll have to bring up examples of this, so I'm reaching out to the parties involved in order to better understand the process that led to these events and ask if you have any reflections on your influence, videos, etc. That way i can give a fuller picture to the audience. So I'm reaching out to give you the opportunity to tell your side of the story if you so choose. Also its worth re-stating that this is a series that isn't so much about kurzgesagt, as it is about pop-explainers, a genre in which include myself. The conclusions I draw will, to the best of my ability, reflect that idea, that it's systemic. By the way, I'm sympathetic of leaving up videos that people enjoy, I've done that myself on my own channel before; sometimes it isn't obvious what the best course of action is with a video Note: I reached out to Johann Hari as well in order to give him the chance to respond to what I see as oversights in his research and clarify But to be clear, there are problems with Hari's work, not just looking back from 2019, but holes in his research that were easily available at the time. An easy example of this might be his New York Times review: "By not looking at the research of Mate, Alexander and Marks through a critical lens, Hari makes it easier for critics to dismiss them outright. That is a shame: While each man pushes his conclusions to extremes unsupported by data, their underlying message that harm reduction is the most rational and humane approach to drug use and abuse is, in fact, backed by copious research Hari might not be passing off other people's work as his own anymore, but he still seems to be looking for quick fixes."That's just one example, but it will do to service the point for now. all this said, I apologize if this is a bit frustrating for you. I enjoy your work and don't want to sully the way you feel about our relationship. I reached out precisely because I want to give you the chance to have a voice in a telling of a story that involves your channel. I will respect whatever route you decide to go Thanks Stephen
FindStephen to Philipp Feb 2, 2019, 3:24 PM Thank you for mentioning that, I will not quote you I'll clarify what I meant by "not making a gotcha piece". A gotcha piece is a "call-out" for views. It's a deliberate framing that doesn't present a full picture or seek to understand context. My intent is not to "call-out" anyone for it's own sake but examine our genre critically. Thats why I'm reaching out. I think this is a story worth telling because it shows the blind-spot (for lack of a better word) of our genre of "pop-explainers". We can convince massive audiences of narratives and stories about the world that, while well-meaning, can sometimes be overly-simplistic or wrong about the evidence However, while telling that story, I'm aware I'll have to bring up examples of this, so I'm reaching out to the parties involved in order to better understand the process that led to these events and ask if you have any reflections on your influence, videos, etc. That way i can give a fuller picture to the audience. So I'm reaching out to give you the opportunity to tell your side of the story if you so choose. Also its worth re-stating that this is a series that isn't so much about kurzgesagt, as it is about pop-explainers, a genre in which include myself. The conclusions I draw will, to the best of my ability, reflect that idea, that it's systemic. By the way, I'm sympathetic of leaving up videos that people enjoy, I've done that myself on my own channel before; sometimes it isn't obvious what the best course of action is with a video Note: I reached out to Johann Hari as well in order to give him the chance to respond to what I see as oversights in his research and clarify But to be clear, there are problems with Hari's work, not just looking back from 2019, but holes in his research that were easily available at the time. An easy example of this might be his New York Times review: "By not looking at the research of Mate, Alexander and Marks through a critical lens, Hari makes it easier for critics to dismiss them outright. That is a shame: While each man pushes his conclusions to extremes unsupported by data, their underlying message that harm reduction is the most rational and humane approach to drug use and abuse is, in fact, backed by copious research Hari might not be passing off other people's work as his own anymore, but he still seems to be looking for quick fixes."That's just one example, but it will do to service the point for now. all this said, I apologize if this is a bit frustrating for you. I enjoy your work and don't want to sully the way you feel about our relationship. I reached out precisely because I want to give you the chance to have a voice in a telling of a story that involves your channel. I will respect whatever route you decide to go Thanks Stephen

Kurzgesagt – In a Nutshell
call-out story pop-science

Email Two

. Philipp Dettm We did not receive any money for the video I would not make a video like that today for obvious reasons. It is not difficult to find critique of Hari's work nowadays. Much less so back when the video Feb 2, 2019, 1:40 PM to me was made. The reason l've kept it online is the countless messages from affected people I got over the years. Apparently the video genuinely helped a lot of individuals to get better. It felt cruel and unnecessary to take this away, so I never could bring myself to take it down Addiction is a complicated topic and far from being solved. So l feel it can continue to exist as a take on the topic that is helpful for many. As I don't see how you are not making a gotcha piece, I don't want to be quoted
. Philipp Dettm We did not receive any money for the video I would not make a video like that today for obvious reasons. It is not difficult to find critique of Hari's work nowadays. Much less so back when the video Feb 2, 2019, 1:40 PM to me was made. The reason l've kept it online is the countless messages from affected people I got over the years. Apparently the video genuinely helped a lot of individuals to get better. It felt cruel and unnecessary to take this away, so I never could bring myself to take it down Addiction is a complicated topic and far from being solved. So l feel it can continue to exist as a take on the topic that is helpful for many. As I don't see how you are not making a gotcha piece, I don't want to be quoted
. Philipp Dettm We did not receive any money for the video I would not make a video like that today for obvious reasons. It is not difficult to find critique of Hari's work nowadays. Much less so back when the video Feb 2, 2019, 1:40 PM to me was made. The reason l've kept it online is the countless messages from affected people I got over the years. Apparently the video genuinely helped a lot of individuals to get better. It felt cruel and unnecessary to take this away, so I never could bring myself to take it down Addiction is a complicated topic and far from being solved. So l feel it can continue to exist as a take on the topic that is helpful for many. As I don't see how you are not making a gotcha piece, I don't want to be quoted

Kurzgesagt – In a Nutshell
quoted gotcha piece

Email One

Sat, Feb 2, 11:29 AM FindStephen to Philipp Hi Philipp, Coffee Break here! I have some tough questions about the video on Addiction that Kurzgesagt did. It's one of your most popular videos with 18M views I'm worried that some of the major claims in that video are vastly oversimplified if not outright incorrect. Namely, the Rat Park results are oversimplified, and replicating B. Alexander's 1975 findings has had mixed results. And more troubling is the human "experiment" of vietnam. In his book, Hari paints a portrait of why soldier's got off their drugs. (they reconnected with their loved ones and got out of their "cage"). Upon further examination this seems incorrect. The person who actually conducted this study Lee Robins disagreed with explicitly with Hari's idea, and came to a much different conclusion for the lack of addiction. lack of availability of heroine, disapproval of friends etc... Now, I understand that the "addiction" video wasn't your typical video since you largely were animating a script from Hari himself, but I still have to ask: Did Kurzgesagt conduct an independent fact-checking of Johann Hari's book before agreeing to this? Were you aware at the time of the collaboration that Johann Hari had a public scandal in the past that threw his credibility into question? Were you paid to promote his book? If it turns out that Hari's major claims were fabricated or wrong, do you believe that Kurzgesagt is in part culpable for the spreading of misinformation? Especially in light of the fact that with 18M views, you've over tripled the distribution of Hari's main thesis in video format I want to be clear, I don't want to cause you concern. I'm not making a "gotcha" piece, I want to examine the role that "popularizers" like Hari, yourself and I play in society learning about science. And what responsibility we hold in making sure we "get the facts right". Your responsibility in this seems particularly unclear since you were mostly animating a script in this case. Thanks and I look forward to hearing back from you! Sincerely, Stephen
Sat, Feb 2, 11:29 AM FindStephen to Philipp Hi Philipp, Coffee Break here! I have some tough questions about the video on Addiction that Kurzgesagt did. It's one of your most popular videos with 18M views I'm worried that some of the major claims in that video are vastly oversimplified if not outright incorrect. Namely, the Rat Park results are oversimplified, and replicating B. Alexander's 1975 findings has had mixed results. And more troubling is the human "experiment" of vietnam. In his book, Hari paints a portrait of why soldier's got off their drugs. (they reconnected with their loved ones and got out of their "cage"). Upon further examination this seems incorrect. The person who actually conducted this study Lee Robins disagreed with explicitly with Hari's idea, and came to a much different conclusion for the lack of addiction. lack of availability of heroine, disapproval of friends etc... Now, I understand that the "addiction" video wasn't your typical video since you largely were animating a script from Hari himself, but I still have to ask: Did Kurzgesagt conduct an independent fact-checking of Johann Hari's book before agreeing to this? Were you aware at the time of the collaboration that Johann Hari had a public scandal in the past that threw his credibility into question? Were you paid to promote his book? If it turns out that Hari's major claims were fabricated or wrong, do you believe that Kurzgesagt is in part culpable for the spreading of misinformation? Especially in light of the fact that with 18M views, you've over tripled the distribution of Hari's main thesis in video format I want to be clear, I don't want to cause you concern. I'm not making a "gotcha" piece, I want to examine the role that "popularizers" like Hari, yourself and I play in society learning about science. And what responsibility we hold in making sure we "get the facts right". Your responsibility in this seems particularly unclear since you were mostly animating a script in this case. Thanks and I look forward to hearing back from you! Sincerely, Stephen
Sat, Feb 2, 11:29 AM FindStephen to Philipp Hi Philipp, Coffee Break here! I have some tough questions about the video on Addiction that Kurzgesagt did. It's one of your most popular videos with 18M views I'm worried that some of the major claims in that video are vastly oversimplified if not outright incorrect. Namely, the Rat Park results are oversimplified, and replicating B. Alexander's 1975 findings has had mixed results. And more troubling is the human "experiment" of vietnam. In his book, Hari paints a portrait of why soldier's got off their drugs. (they reconnected with their loved ones and got out of their "cage"). Upon further examination this seems incorrect. The person who actually conducted this study Lee Robins disagreed with explicitly with Hari's idea, and came to a much different conclusion for the lack of addiction. lack of availability of heroine, disapproval of friends etc... Now, I understand that the "addiction" video wasn't your typical video since you largely were animating a script from Hari himself, but I still have to ask: Did Kurzgesagt conduct an independent fact-checking of Johann Hari's book before agreeing to this? Were you aware at the time of the collaboration that Johann Hari had a public scandal in the past that threw his credibility into question? Were you paid to promote his book? If it turns out that Hari's major claims were fabricated or wrong, do you believe that Kurzgesagt is in part culpable for the spreading of misinformation? Especially in light of the fact that with 18M views, you've over tripled the distribution of Hari's main thesis in video format I want to be clear, I don't want to cause you concern. I'm not making a "gotcha" piece, I want to examine the role that "popularizers" like Hari, yourself and I play in society learning about science. And what responsibility we hold in making sure we "get the facts right". Your responsibility in this seems particularly unclear since you were mostly animating a script in this case. Thanks and I look forward to hearing back from you! Sincerely, Stephen

Kurzgesagt – In a Nutshell
hari addiction philipp

poster

21 NEWS youtube.com/inanutshell
21 NEWS youtube.com/inanutshell
21 NEWS youtube.com/inanutshell

Kurzgesagt – In a Nutshell
poster minimalist animation digital art
Meme Encyclopedia
Media
Editorials
More
KYM facebook KYM instagram KYM tiktok KYM twitter/x KYM youtube KYM discord KYM discord

Legal Information: Know Your Meme ® is a trademark of  Literally Media Ltd . By using this site, you are agreeing by the site's terms of use and  privacy policy and  DMCA policy .

© 2007-2025 Literally Media Ltd.