The short YouTube video, the indivisible audiovisual unit of our time
June, 15; 2026. By Arscodex
At this point, it's important to note that there's a type of video that stands out as the defining audiovisual unit of our time: the short YouTube video.
Indeed, a short YouTube video, between one and three minutes long, is presented as the atom, the indivisible audiovisual unit of our day. There's an even smaller format, the short "reel" or "story" on Instagram or TikTok (approximately 35 seconds long), as well as the 20-second commercial, but we'll leave these aside since they can't be considered "cinematic" forms; rather, they could be considered... well, we're not entirely sure how they can be classified, but we'll effectively and consciously exclude these formats from the scope of this study.
In principle, if someone wants to become a film director today, they already know what they have to do: record a one-to three-minute video and upload it to YouTube. If that person manages to attract attention, for whatever reason, with that video, then they've begun their journey toward becoming a filmmaker. Otherwise, he/she might look elsewhere.
The competition is fierce. There are currently millions, perhaps billions, of videos on that platform; therefore, if someone is able to attract attention, as we've said, we're on the right track.
On the other hand, all those individuals or business groups who boast of having a "traditional" television license—those semi-obsolete digital terrestrial television (DTT) licenses like those held by RTVE or Atresmedia—might start to realize that if they lack talent (that is, if they aren't capable of capturing the viewer's attention, like a successful, short, and narrated YouTube video), instead of having an asset, they'll have a liability and will indeed have to spend money, whether from subsidies or elsewhere, to maintain that media operation.
It might seem that in a specific ecosystem (a country's specific audiovisual sector or something like that) such a "media setup" could be maintained, but ladies and gentlemen, we live in a global world, and if another country or third-party entity is able to manage its audiovisual capacity better (that is, make better use of its talent), sooner or later these outdated licenses are destined to compete with short YouTube videos, that is, with the indivisible audiovisual unit of our time. And if they don't offer anything better, as we've said and will retell again, they know where they're headed.
Regarding YouTube's relationship with the media group writing these lines, we must say that we are "outside" this ecosystem, exempt from competing with YouTube, mainly because seven months before this video-sharing platform even existed, we launched our audiovisual project: Interviews, shaping the internet; therefore, we don't really need to compete with that site since we predated it.
So, these three points remain: the short YouTube video is clearly the indivisible audiovisual unit of our time; anyone who wants to be a filmmaker must be able to capture attention with one of these videos; and if a company is unable to offer anything better than this, no matter how many television licenses and administrative approvals it may have, it is condemned to spend money and resources to maintain its "media racket".
Indeed, a short YouTube video, between one and three minutes long, is presented as the atom, the indivisible audiovisual unit of our day. There's an even smaller format, the short "reel" or "story" on Instagram or TikTok (approximately 35 seconds long), as well as the 20-second commercial, but we'll leave these aside since they can't be considered "cinematic" forms; rather, they could be considered... well, we're not entirely sure how they can be classified, but we'll effectively and consciously exclude these formats from the scope of this study.
In principle, if someone wants to become a film director today, they already know what they have to do: record a one-to three-minute video and upload it to YouTube. If that person manages to attract attention, for whatever reason, with that video, then they've begun their journey toward becoming a filmmaker. Otherwise, he/she might look elsewhere.
The competition is fierce. There are currently millions, perhaps billions, of videos on that platform; therefore, if someone is able to attract attention, as we've said, we're on the right track.
On the other hand, all those individuals or business groups who boast of having a "traditional" television license—those semi-obsolete digital terrestrial television (DTT) licenses like those held by RTVE or Atresmedia—might start to realize that if they lack talent (that is, if they aren't capable of capturing the viewer's attention, like a successful, short, and narrated YouTube video), instead of having an asset, they'll have a liability and will indeed have to spend money, whether from subsidies or elsewhere, to maintain that media operation.
It might seem that in a specific ecosystem (a country's specific audiovisual sector or something like that) such a "media setup" could be maintained, but ladies and gentlemen, we live in a global world, and if another country or third-party entity is able to manage its audiovisual capacity better (that is, make better use of its talent), sooner or later these outdated licenses are destined to compete with short YouTube videos, that is, with the indivisible audiovisual unit of our time. And if they don't offer anything better, as we've said and will retell again, they know where they're headed.
Regarding YouTube's relationship with the media group writing these lines, we must say that we are "outside" this ecosystem, exempt from competing with YouTube, mainly because seven months before this video-sharing platform even existed, we launched our audiovisual project: Interviews, shaping the internet; therefore, we don't really need to compete with that site since we predated it.
So, these three points remain: the short YouTube video is clearly the indivisible audiovisual unit of our time; anyone who wants to be a filmmaker must be able to capture attention with one of these videos; and if a company is unable to offer anything better than this, no matter how many television licenses and administrative approvals it may have, it is condemned to spend money and resources to maintain its "media racket".
Featured links in works
