Is it okay for an educational YouTube channel to receive grants from billionaires' foundations?

What if the funding isn't disclosed until the very end of the video, sometimes not even spoken out loud. Just written on the screen?

The Hated One

I answered no, but then I thought about it for a bit... and I'm not sure if that's my answer. I would prefer it if an educational channel doesn't receive funding from a billionaire, however I think that is their right to receive that money. The important thing is that the funding is clearly disclosed by the end of the intro.

No only if it is communicated up front

No it have to be up front. If it is communicated up front I could decide do I Want to give the Creator a chance But if it is communicated at the end of the video I feel deceived. I don’t like this. I would ask me did the creator mentioned all payments what if I didn’t noticed it or did I lost some disclaimers in the past how could I know it

What if it's only mentioned silently in text in the last few seconds of the video? Or vocally mentioned in the outro?

The Hated One

Yes, I sense the same fallacy here. Why would some billionaires be fine but not others.

The Hated One

I find it interesting that the most popular answer is "Depends on the billionaire/foundation" but who decides which billionaire is to be trusted? And what metrics do YOU use to evaluate which billionaire is to be trusted?? To me this is a logical error

Samuel Lembke

Yes if it is transparent communicated in the video and the profile otherwise clearly not

I can't say if it's okay, though it is quite sus

It is totally fine doing education or science for the money. The issue is if the focus is skewed by the sources of the money. People like to pretend they are above that and can't be biased based on the source of their income but that's hardly ever true.

The Hated One

I agree that educational channels should be treated the same way as educational institutions. Would you have any stipulation against public funding of these educational creators?

The Hated One

Short of seeing the contract and knowing how much say sponsors had during production, it's gonna be impossible to prove content isn't biased or untainted.

The Hated One

Anonymous funding is an interesting idea. How could you make sure donors names are removed from grantees?

The Hated One

I have read pro and con arguments from everyone else so far and I agree with most of what is said on both sides. Any funding can be subject to bias or coerce particular messages, either with strings attached or simply by giving the money to people who have a known bias. But maybe we should think about what community educational content would look like if there was no funding from outside sources at all? Would it be better or worse? Would it reduce quality or bias? Is an author who is passionate about something a better source for accurate and engaging content than someone who is doing it for the money?

SteveC

No educator, regardless of the platform they teach on, should ever accept grants from billionaires or private entities. I'm coming from knowing a student right now who, along with their peers, is dealing with their administrators pocketing grant funds for themselves and not giving back to the students' education nor to the resources that could help them and the marginalized communities those students are trying to help. What this looks like is 15% funding cuts to student-community centers, shit pay increases for teacher assistants that barely keep them above inflation prices, and meanwhile, a chancellor gets a $400,000 salary increase and the university police get triple of what student-community centers get in funding. Now this may not be about propaganda or any video or written content, but this is still the issue of how educational experience can be corrupted by billionaires, and I think that in some ways, we have to treat educational channels the same way we treat our educational institutions. The educational quality suffers, values are betrayed, and there's a loss of trust between the student and the educator, and even if you're just one YouTuber who isn't officially tied to anything nor will experience things like people do in public education, I feel that these are things that still apply to you. Personally, I have high standards for YouTube education channels because I expect them to give education that directly benefits people who don't have easy access to education anywhere else. Educational videos are not supposed to be entertainment nor a vehicle for a person or group to make themselves look good. They're educational for a reason. The whole point of giving education to people should be that there is knowledge that we don't know that we should know, especially if it's knowledge about something that can hurt someone else or even all of us, and that we have to take action to inform as many people as possible of what regardless of how much we struggle along the way. That's why we have journalists, whistleblowers, watchdog organizations, and activists. Additionally, when you've got streams of high income, such as a successful Patreon, sponsorship deals, and billionaire grants, going into your educational videos, then you're not an educator to me, or rather you stop being one in my eyes. You're just an enthusiast of a subject, and a privileged one at that. As much as possible, I make sure to appreciate the people I learn from, whether it's by continuing to build my life from the knowledge they gave me after they leave my life or by financially contributing to you, The Hated One. Most of the knowledge I gained about current events or skills wasn't through hard work, but by the example of somebody who's already done that work, and it's because of this that I try not to anything for granted. And this is what I hope that educational channels don't forget, that they were once people who didn't have the power to learn and that there's people out there now who could really use that knowledge to survive.

Petrified

Yes if it's unconditional.

Humble_Swede

Transparency is key here. Most YT videos now come with a sponsorship segment, which typically leads into the ad... I wasn't aware of Kurzgesagst funding, so this will definitely make me reevaluate my opinion of them. For those saying no conflicts of interest/strings attached: this is extremely hard to gauge, if not outright impossible. The pressure will always be there and not all interactions between both parties is necessarily tracked in writing. Better to just enforce what's pragmatic.

Eight-Legged Dj

Education needs to be funded, but it should be funded anonymously. Should be absolutely no strings attached, and no trail to follow for the recipient to kiss ass for.

James Del Duca