Opinion: The Jubilee Problem
Jubilee's YouTube channel platforms hate speech and trauma porn and we're all just supposed to be okay with it?
When I tell you this one has been bouncing around in my mind for over three years, I am not exaggerating.
Picture a fourteen year old version of me, naive, curious and the owner of a mystical device that gave me full access to the unrestricted internet (thanks mum and dad). Enter, Jubilee. The cure to my boredom, and apparently 8.56 million others’.
For those of you who may not know, Jubilee is a YouTube channel that garnered popularity from viral clips of YouTube videos, such as those from their middle ground or spectrum series’ that have been an integral part of the channel for probably around five years now. Harmless on the surface, these videos intend to cultivate good debate, to broadcast a spectrum of ideas and encourage people to engage with various perspectives on niche issues.
After researching this topic, I discovered that this channel, founded by Jason Y. Lee, was initially started as a non-profit, charitable organisation. Around seven years after it’s conception, the creator changed it to a for-profit company after raising over $650,000.
Jubilee Media, as it is currently known, is comprised of several series - this piece will only be focusing on one in precise detail. To put it into their own words, Jubilee Media “is a digital media company that pushes boundaries, tackles taboos, and breaks the rules. We believe discomfort and conflict are pivotal forces in creating human connection. In short, we’re not afraid to go there.”
I can almost vividly recall one of my closest friends sending clip after clip of Jubilee videos, and using it as a platform for discussion and debate amongst our peer group. Often times, this was fruitless - most of our opinions were shared. But other times, it fostered tense dialogues, awkward silences and passionate arguments both online and in person. In short; their forum seemed to be working.
One of the first videos of theirs I’d found alone and watched in full was the original video they published on Israel and Palestine; Can Israelis and Palestinians see eye to eye?. Thankfully, prior to engaging with this video I had researched this historic ‘conflict’ for a school project, so you can almost imagine my horror at the audacity of this channel to situate individuals around a table to discuss such a charged subject matter, that is still devastating millions of people today.
Without going too much into the genocidal acts Israel is committing against Palestine in 2024, I think most people can understand the sheer weight - regardless of your stance on this one-sided war - of this video, and the potential environment it subsequently generated.
Comments under the video have changed considering the recent re-entry of the Israel-Palestinian ‘debate’ into the mainstream, and most of them outline what this piece is trying to get at.
“The fact that Hannah and Arab had family members murdered by IDF and had to sit in front of two IDF soldiers to find "a middle ground" isn't only ridiculous, it's inhumane” - @|evled8519
“I am neither Palestinian nor Israeli but I simply cannot imagine the amount of strength of character it would take to retain my composure being told my country was ‘not your land’ by a comrade of the cell that murdered my little sister or my father.” - @|@JonVonD
While researching for this, I attempted to watch that video in full. I couldn’t. I have no personal affiliation with either side, only empathy and humanity, and I simply could not and cannot still fathom how the Palestinian’s were able to sit across from people (albeit only a few of those selected) who were denying cries for peace, help and compromise. How the Palestinian’s were able to sit and listen to people who had a hand - however indirect - in the murder of their loved ones; some children.
The Israel-Palestine video, and the one similar about Ukraine and Russia, is particularly concerning as it almost places the onus on individual citizens; completely ignoring the potential for indoctrination, propaganda and the fact that the majority of issues such as war in the world start at the top. The sociological and political analysis of these videos will come later, but as for now, these videos - however intentional - serve the interests of the elite; those in power who have the most to gain from conversations surrounding topics as large as these being trivialised and commercialised for entertainment - it gives the false illusion of autonomy and discourse when in reality reproduces existing inequalities. They keep the debates among regular people so the governments and higher ups can continue to avoid culpability.
The point I’m trying to get at here is that these videos conceptualised by Jubilee Media; however well-intended, (see: “In short, we’re not afraid to go there.”) are far more harmful than they are good.
These issues are not a game; they are topics that have real impact on real people. The trivialisation of such divisive ideals is most definitely a cause for concern - there is no acknowledgement of the potential for hate speech; no context provided and no acknowledgement of the environment it cultivates both beneath the video in the comment sections and across varying platforms that clip and re-share the ideas put forward by individuals - sometimes taken out of context. While I understand that these people volunteer to engage in these discussions - my issue lies primarily with what they are forced to encounter upon arrival.
The example above was not the only of it’s kind; and I have linked a few I found by simply flicking through their Middle Ground playlist to the bottom of this piece. Some include polarising groups such as BLM activists and law enforcement officials, “male right’s activists” and feminists, and mass shooting survivors and NRA members.
The titles of these alone ring alarm bells in my mind; how can one justify positing the survivors of mass shootings in front of individuals who are attempting to justify the continued use of the very guns used to massacre people they may have known, loved and been with when they breathed their last breath?
For me personally, the first video that truly turned me away from Jubilee Media was their decision to validate the notion that feminism does not advocate for men’s rights as a part of the movement - inadvertently justifying the idea that feminists are man haters and aren’t advocating for men to the point where an entire counter movement had to be devised. It is harmful, misrepresentative and frankly mythical to suggest and platform such ideas.
The same can be applied to videos pertaining to opposing body positive individuals and fitness enthusiasts - is this really a necessary dialogue? Is there truly tension between these two groups? The very premise of body positivity is just to encourage comfortability and acceptance of one’s own skin - this doesn’t automatically mean the promotion of unhealthy habits, and thus also implicitly suggests from title alone that all fat people are ‘unhealthy’ - completely glossing over the nuanced experience of fat people - some of whom are fat due to medical conditions or simply genetics. Are we creating imaginary enemies here? Well, imaginary enemies that may manifest into real arguments as a direct result of these videos.
Please understand, by no means am I attempting to minimise the potential enlightening and reformative impact open discussions can foster, I am simply suggesting that some of the dialogues platformed are far more nuanced, contextual and historical than Jubilee Media articulates. And some of them (if not all) cultivate spaces of hate rather than empathy and open-mindedness.
This is without even touching upon the polarisation of BLM activists and law enforcement. The commentary on this one feels redundant. And on the literal questioning of science, the mere suggestion that there is a debate to be had between flat earthers and scientists is just regressive and frankly stupid; there is no credence to claims of a flat earth, and any suggestion in support of this is quite literally rendered moot by the plethora of scientific research that proves otherwise.
In terms of the sociological underpinnings and intruige surrounding platforms such as Jubilee Media, the recent explosion in popularity of social media has led sociologists to assess and analyse social media platforms and their potential influences on society, individuals and opinions.
In Ruha Benjamin’s Race After Technology: Abolitionist Tools for the New Jim Code she discusses at length how technology is intrinsically biassed due to it’s coding being complete within the context of the societies in which it operates. In short, she discusses how algorithms and technology in their very hardwiring are encoded with racial biases, and thus ultimately - however unconsciously - reinforce and uphold pre-existing social and political structures that have permeated and divided our societies for centuries.
Her work is incredibly alarming, yet essential, as it dispels the myth of neutrality that is oftentimes associated as a by-product of our increased reliance or use of technology. It reiterates to us, as is necessary, that nothing man-made is ever neutral, objective, or uncompromised.
This applies to Jubilee Media in a very unique way, as off the back of these literal integral biases and discriminatory dispositions, creators of social media platforms such as X (formerly known as Twitter) and Facebook (Meta as a whole) have admitted to platforming and promoting discourse online that provokes conversation; that cultivates tension and drama. We see it outside of these platforms too, what with clickbait becoming embedded within common vernacular when talking about the internet, or Fake News becoming so widespread former President Donald Trump weaponised it to demonise or belittle any piece of media that criticised him or that he disagreed with.
In this way, Jubilee Media understands that it profits off of controversy; it understands that the videos and content that reach the widest people and gains the most engagement are those that provoke, and thus they lean into it.
They weaponise these often highly politicised topics and utilise it for profit - they polarise issues and trivialise them to such a degree that they become palatable enough to invite people who are very often uninformed about such large topics to share more incorrect opinion in various spaces across the internet.
In my opinion, this is terrifying. Moral panics surrounding impressionable youth having access to the unrestricted internet although often times dramatic come from genuineness; echo chambers and the consumption of particular content to the alt-right pipeline are real. Children are impressionable, and they do have access to a wealth of information - and that includes that of a harmful nature.
Jubilee Media is structured in such a way that it is incredibly digestible and intruiging to people of all ages, but considering the fact that a comparatively uneducated (naturally) 14 year old version of myself consumed these videos like it was a-sweet-treat-after-dinner is enough to raise alarm bells.
And what’s worse? They know this. They know how damaging their content can be, and how divisive the culture that it brings can become, but they simply do not care. In fact, quite the opposite - they encourage it. Their slogan is quite literally “We’re not afraid to go there.”
Their goal to “provoke understanding & create human connection” is lost when they platform so many harmful and frankly incorrect topics.
I’m not the only one who has her qualms with Jubilee Media; in the time I’ve spent on this piece, I’ve come across numerous YouTube Essays unpacking Jubilee in similar ways to me, as well as TikToks circulating in response to a video that was published while I was writing this.
White Feminists vs POC Anti-Feminists.
I’m literally rolling my eyes writing that title.
In case I haven’t already said, I feel as though I could write a dissertation on the Jubilee Problem, especially considering Middle Ground is perhaps the lesser of two evils when it comes to some of the categories their channel platforms. I’m going to link some videos that articulates quite well my feelings towards the Jubilee topic more generally, because as I said - I fear this piece will become far too long if I attempt to truthfully engage with this video and it’s idiocy in full.
(Dis)Respectfully.
Funnily enough, I started writing this piece in May (procrastination is a bitch) and Jubilee has recently entered public discourse AGAIN due to the framing of their videos. The most recent offenders?
In all honesty, I must say thank you to the Jubilee Gods for quite literally epitomising my point throughout this (somewhat) guided rant.
First of all, lets look at the framing. This is a key issue with Jubilee, as the way in which they choose to frame and phrase their thumbnails, video titles and ‘debates’ are very indicative of the wider issue at hand. I’d also like to note the difference between the thumbnails and the taglines for both videos; for the 1 Liberal vs 20 Trump Supporters, the thumbnail (likely the most eye-catching part that actually will encourage clicks) posits Dean (a great debater and a man with far more patience than I could ever dream of possessing) as a ‘liberal’ while the title presents him as a ‘woke’ teen, and on the flip side (25 Liberal College Students vs 1 Conservative) the inverse happens - the term ‘woke’ is used on the thumbnail, while the term ‘liberal’ is used in the title.
Not to mention the use of ‘outsmart’ vs ‘survive’, the placement of the majority before the minority in the conservative context - a rhetoric reflective of wider phenomena surrounding the allegedly pervasive ‘woke snowflake brigade’ - and the use of a literal political activist (he has a wikipedia page!!) for a debate against plainly unqualified STUDENTS.
Now, there are certainly justifications for this difference from a marketing standpoint; ‘Trump’ and ‘Woke’ garner more clicks and discourse than ‘Liberal’ and ‘Conservative’ purely due to what is commonplace in internet vernacular; the audiences they are attempting to target here get riled up by the former two words than the latter. But deeper than that, it just seems to me as the most perfect example of the ways in which Jubilee’s entire raison d’etre is to stoke the flames of incredibly polarising and (shock) genuinely impactful ideological divides; especially in the American context what with the upcoming elections and the threat of Project 2025 as well as the consistent erosion of American democracy we see Trump becoming more and more committed to. Their true purpose then must be simply to profit off of internet discourses for selfish reasons rather than to cultivate regardless of how this constant platforming of unsupported incorrect claims shape real lives.
Also, in terms of the actual content of these videos, and I am being nit picky here, the individuals who engage in the discussion do not let people finish sentences, dispute fact with fallacy and simply refuse to acknowledge tangible evidence when presented with it. Some people just like to argue - they don’t go into these conversations with an open mind and the possibility of change - how is any of this a mark of a discussion that fosters human connection?
In sum, this piece was more an attempt to provide some food for thought more so than an overt call to action, because as unsettling as it is - what can I, or you really do about this other than chew on it and decide whether or not to consume or platform content of this nature?
Me rambling about this for about two thousand words doesn’t stop them from producing content. I just hope to have promoted some level of analysis when it comes to social media and channels like this.
So, call me a debby downer or a snowflake - but my concerns are valid; and the impact of Jubilee should not be understated or overlooked. Freedom of speech does not mean freedom of reach, and the conscious rejection of inflammatory content and ‘rage bait’ such as Jubilee is something that should seriously be considered going forward. This goes back to inherent algorithmic biases I mentioned earlier in this piece. Social media and the concerns around it are incredibly important to analyse, especially through the lens of social sciences. And Jubilee will continue to be hated by me for as long as it exists.
The Jubilee Problem:
“It is not the job of the oppressed to offer empathy or listen to the oppressor” (!!!) - Jaidyn from the YT vid 30:31-30:38
Again; I don’t think these people are inherently evil nor do I think they started this with malicious intent - I just think the ramifications for most of what they do are really, really concerning and were a huge oversight when conceptualising these ideas - fun in theory but devastating in execution.
Jubilee Categories:
In case anyone is interested; here’s a list of the main content Jubilee produces and their own descriptions of each. The issues are quite blatant.
Middle Ground - Middle Ground explores whether two different groups of people, opposed in their beliefs, can come together empathetically and find middle ground.
Spectrum - Spectrum explores the variety of beliefs within an individualized group to break down stereotypes and showcasing complexities.
Ranking - Ranking is a social experiment about how we judge and perceive ourselves in relation to others. Contestants debate and rank each other based on their perceptions (Ranked by Fashion Sense, Ranked Most American) before being shown a TRUE, measurable ranking.
Odd One Out - Odd One Out explores identity, group-think, and how we judge people— a group of strangers that share a common characteristic have to find the one member within the group that doesn’t belong. The winner(s) takes home a cash prize.
Useful Links:
Jubilee | Middle Ground Playlist
Other Commentaries:
I read this article back in October. Everything you said about Jubilee is true. Their videos are not only controversial but also give a platform to the worst people. Or to people who don't have a spine and let others walk over them. I remember one video I watched from them which was a debate between blacks and Asians. There was one black lady who worked at an IT job where most of her coworkers were either white or Asian. She was harping about how much she hated Asians and that she received better treatment from her white coworkers. What's worse is that the liberal Asians on the video agreed with every negative thing she was saying about Asians. She was degrading and insulting Asians yet they sympathized with her. It felt like I was watching a clown show. 🤡 Then, this same lady went on to say she would love to have positive stereotypes like Asians do, but she doesn't because she's black. So, in her mind, being black automatically has to do with negative stereotypes while being Asian doesn't. I wouldn't be surprised if she was the one who treated her Asian coworkers terribly first as to why many of them don't like her. Prior to watching this insulting video by Jubilee, I saw another video where all these Asian celebrities sat down and had a meal discussing the pandemic and other issues that affected the Asian community. While the dialogue between the celebrities wasn't the worst part, the notes they read from Asian Americans who had more problems than them just ruined the theme of the video. I write all of this to show just how problematic most of their videos are even supposedly positive ones like the one where different celebrities gathered together for a meal. I feel like their videos overall are exploitative and contributes to the overall political and social polarization that's dividing American society as a whole.