We like that in Wuant's video

It was another day in Shifter. We suddenly noticed that one or two of our articles on article 13, "already old", were receiving a considerable number of visits. We do not realize immediately why. On Twitter, "Many Kids" commented on the end of YouTube, social networks and the Internet. I open one of these the sons and I see a reference to a video of Wuant. I go to YouTube and quickly find the saying: "My channel will be deleted".

The title of the video is alarmist, as is the video itself. And you can understand why: Wuant was worried after receiving a communication from YouTube regarding Article 13. In the video, Wuant describes the stakes of copyright reform being prepared in the European Union and should be finalized next year, also mentioning the controversial Article 11.

With some exaggerations and some inaccuracies, it is true that the Youtuber The Portuguese – which has more than 3 million subscribers only on Google's video platform – was able to bring the subject of Articles 13 and 11 back to public discussion and, more importantly, alert a new audience to the question. And that is valuable. The video released on Monday quickly revealed YouTube's trends in Portugal, rising from fourth to second place between Tuesday and Wednesday. And that already exceeds 1.18 million views – which puts it in perspective: in just two or three days, Wuant has virtually reached the same audience as in Portugal, a newscast reaches its highest level or that # 39, a news site accumulates in one month. together.

The inaccuracies of Wuant in his video might have been avoided through more in-depth research, but you have to be fair on one point: it's a pretty complex topic – the difficulty to clearly perceive is the l & # 39; one criticism – and the press It is possible to find approaches as ambiguous as those of Wuant – for example, Jornal de Notícias emphasizes in this article that "At the beginning [o Artigo 13] would be a good thing for youtubers, but they disagree ". In this context, one must distinguish a substantial difference between Wuant and the press: the first product of entertainment, the second provides information. It is also worth highlighting the effort of this Youtuber approach "A very serious business" as he describes himself. Basically, your video is (or should be) understood as an honest and crude expression of those who are concerned about a reform that, if advanced as it is written today, may question the platform where she publishes and her work.

Wuant takes advantage of several quotes to try to correct your video factually and invites your viewers to search for more information. His message is mainly alarming, but it turned out: on Twitter, it was possible to check if several teenagers shared links to articles that they drove, including some of Shifter – people who, if at all (not to say "certainly"), were completely unaware of the copyright reform that has been going on since 2016.

Let's face it: the media coverage of the issue is far below that of more traditional media. Why why "Traditional media and music publishers"As Wuant points out, they are particularly interested in the current reform, as it has been drafted. Wuant is, in fact, harsh in this criticism, even speaking boycott that encourages creativity online and not "Make the most of people's money".

It was these same traditional media that, in response to Wuant's video, were quick to point out what he had missed. From the observer to Jornal de Negócios mentioned above. From SIC Notícias to Diário de Notícias. It is the same media that has given little or no importance to the assertion that several digital rights advocates, thousands of people around the world, have actively implemented articles 13 and 11 of the reform. proposed, sometimes classifying them as the deprecatory term (and unclear in the General public) of "pirates".

Wuant has a wide audience and is therefore able to influence more people online. But the role of the journalist and journalism should not be to echo his voice, but to present to the reader, the viewer or the listener a global perspective of the overall contest. Because it's not a Wuant affair; what sense is so "fuss" why a Youtuber says or did not say? What's different from one voice on YouTube to another on a blog, on Twitter, in an organized movement? In addition, if the media had treated Articles 13 and 11 in a clear and concrete way, what a non-newspaper buyer had understood but also a follower of Wuant, this video might not have been aroused the anxiety that it has engendered.

In conclusion, an important note: YouTube insisted that Article 13 not be put forward as proposed; The company, a subsidiary of Google, claims to understand the need for copyright reform, but points out that one that is on the table will hurt the creators who publish on its platform and viewers of the film. ;European Union. The company posted open letters and contacted the youtubers by email, which have acceded to the company's request and created videos to alert the public about the problem – from the United States to Portugal.

For Wuant, we still have a challenge: why not a series of "serious" problems, for example the European elections next year, in which, as European citizens, we will have the opportunity to vote for the deputies and political forces we want for the European Parliament and who can influence reforms like this? After all, for us Wuants are not "Internet parasites".