you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 13 points 2 years ago* (2 children)
  • [–] 1 point 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

    I think this is a very interesting take, but I am curious about how the career in youtube is better than the academia as she describes it.

    Obviously, the discrimination against female and writing without proper acknowledgement is absolutely unacceptable, but I have never heard about anything like this in my field.

    However, I feel like youtube is likely a more competitive landscape than grant writing. I think it is very likely the administrative overhead for youtuber is more than 15%, and youtuber needs to get the interest of people completely ignorant of the subject, not just experts, plus battling the unpredictbility of youtube algorithm.

    Of course, I am not trying to downplay the problem she mentioned, but I am just wondering how youtube is a better alternative career, considering her goal to do "serious and innovative science".

  • source
  • parent