debate

The Galician streamer The Xokas sat opposite several ideological rivals in a debate produced and presented by Ibai Llanos on YouTube. The format, which draws directly from the Anglo-Saxon model popularized by Charlie Kirk and ‘Turning Point USA’, leaves open a few questions about the politicization of streaming entertainment and the risks of a genre that turns ideas into spectacle. The Xoqué? If you have been under a virtual rock in recent months and have no idea who El Xkoxas is, here are some facts: Gonzalo Pérez grew up like streamer during the pandemic years, the same period in which platforms like Twitch They multiplied their user base in Europe. Millions of confined people found in these new communicators a company that traditional television did not offer them, and creators like El Xokas capitalized on it. Its followers are mostly young men, between 16 and 30 years old, a very important fact to understand the drift towards incendiary political opinions that its content is having lately. It becomes politicized. The transition of gaming to the political commentary It was not a leap, but a gradual change. Xokas incorporated opinions on current affairs, criticism of what he called “single thinking” and positions on cultural debates (feminism, identity, political correctness) that generated more opinions for and against than any video game game. The search for controversy is a strategy that YouTube algorithm rewards to a greater extent than neutral content. Its truthfulness or independence are aspects completely unrelated to success. Consequence of this drift: He doesn’t invent anything. The “political streamer” is a figure who has come a long way outside of Spain. Figures like Tim Pool either Steven Crowder In the United States they created a template that El Xokas is now repeating: they build a base audience on entertainment topics and when they grow, they pivot towards political commentary, without losing followers along the way, and gaining many new ones. Until recently, our ecosystem of creators declared itself apolitical, with successful streamers like Ibai or El Rubius absolutely oblivious to this type of controversy (and although it is often easy to detect the colors, never declared, of creators like AuronPlay, TheGrefg or Illojuan). The model that Kirk invented. And so we come to the debate of ‘Xokas vs. 8 haters’: eight people critical of the streamer’s career debate with him one by one, with Ibai as host and referee. They talked about Xokas’ personality, politics, economics or feminism and four days later, the video has exceeded four and a half million views. It is a format copied from the debates that Charlie Kirk, A conservative debater, he was organizing until his death since 2012: he in the center, progressive students rebutting him one after another, with Kirk responding to each argument before moving on to the next. The format problem. Different studies have pointed out problems with the format, which make rhetorical ability the true value of these discussions: whoever speaks faster and with more confidence seems to win even if their data is incorrect. In the absence of real-time verification mechanisms, the appearance of handling authentic data matters more than actually doing so. The central debater has an advantage due to the confrontation with successive rivals, which eliminates the pressure of arguments: every time a rival finds a line of argument, time runs out. This Spanish version has some added problems: the title itself already generates an editorial reading: naming the critics as “haters” implies that Xokas is the one who is right: if he debates against “haters”, any argument they raise is associated in advance with bad faith, not with reasoning. Politics, on YouTube. A recent Reuters report documents that Spain follows the European trend of shifting information consumption towards video platforms. Those under 35 years of age are the group furthest from traditional formats and, therefore, are more exposed to political opinion mediated by content creators. That is, the public conversation about taxes, feminism or freedom of expression occurs in environments where the editorial rules are different, more wild and less regulated than those of a conventional medium. History of controversies. To get an idea of ​​how the Xokas positions may be affecting younger people, these are some of the controversial opinions they have expressed: Critical in 2021 to ElRubius and TheGrefg for going to Andorra to pay less taxes. Less than a year later, he threatened to leave if they kept uploading them to him. His trick stolen from “a friend” to flirt with drunk girls was the one who generated more criticism outside the streaming environment, and motivated the famous video of the Ministry of Equality in which he was actively identified as one of the main sources of sexist attitudes of mass reach in Spain. In March 2022, it was discovered that her Twitter defender @CathyVipi, which she used to insult critics and competitors, he carried it himself. He stated that the majority of people who cannot change their physique are “undisciplined and lazy“, rejecting the influence of genetic or psychological factors. It was criticized how opinions of this type can affect young followers. After invest in Knoweatsa home-prepared food company, publicly attacked Wetaca (direct competition) in a live broadcast. Wetaca responded on social media by recovering previous statements from Xokas in which it said that “eating healthy is stupid“. Controlling the narrative of all these controversies is essential for El Xokas and his occasional ally Ibai. For this, nothing better than a trap debate. In Xataka | China has solved the mystery of why there are people who go bankrupt watching streams: the “榜一大哥”