I’m struggling with video project, and I’d like to share the reasons

By David McElroy · July 19, 2021

I doubt you care about this, but I need to talk about it. Will you forgive me?

I’m struggling to launch DavidMcElroy.TV. In the early stages, I was struggling with technical and creative issues, but I’m past enough of those to get started. For the last few weeks, the issues have been more fundamental.

What do I want this channel to be? And what will convince you to watch?

When I worked in politics, I had a simple goal that drove every decision I made. If my client won, that’s all that mattered. I felt that I understood how to manipulate voters, so if you gave me an appropriate budget — in a district where I understood the demographics — I knew how to achieve the goal.

I wasn’t concerned with my personal beliefs. I wasn’t trying to make great art. I didn’t care whether voters liked me. In the words of legendary Oakland Raiders owner Al Davis, “Just win, baby!”

Today, I’m trying to build a commercial audience, so I have to care what the audience thinks. But I want to make something I’m proud of — something that represents my view of the world — so I’m struggling to figure out what will achieve both of those goals.

Am I here to explain complicated philosophical ideas that matter to me — and few others — even if I try to avoid seeming nerdy about it? Am I here to entertain and amuse a passive audience, even if it means dumbing the ideas down?

And can I set aside my ego enough to find a compromise between my intellectual integrity and my need to run a business?

For lack of a better way to frame it, I can’t decide whether I’m an artist or a businessman for this project.

At heart, I’m still an idealist who wants to save the world with my ideas. I am arrogant enough to believe that I see things that can be life-changing for individuals and world-changing for groups. I’m like an Old Testament prophet who believes he’s been given a word from heaven — and he goes out into the world angrily telling people to repent. (That often didn’t end well.)

But in the case of DavidMcElroy.TV, I want to make a living. I’ve spent many months studying how others have done this on YouTube and I know I can do the same. With the right strategic decisions — and a little luck — I can turn this into a six-figure (or maybe even seven-figure) income stream every year. That’s very doable.

So there’s a part of me which wants to “go Old Testament” with my message. I want to tell people to stop being so intellectually lazy and comfortable with a lifestyle which is going to collapse. I want to badger them into waking up and seeing how their lives need to change to be ready for what’s ahead.

But there’s another part of me which understands that isn’t exactly a way to sell an idea to the people who most need to hear it. That part of me wants to dumb things down and feed people in little bite-sized chunks, as I add enough humor and entertainment value to attract the folks who want to laugh along while they eat their Cheetos and change nothing about their lives.

And there’s yet another part of me which says, “Hey, guys, y’all can fight it out for what you turn this into, but please just don’t embarrass me!”

That’s my ridiculous ego speaking — and he’s not accustomed to taking this sort of chance, because he thinks he’s too good to lower himself to playing the part of a video entertainer. That part of me is scared of looking foolish — and I keep trying to hide the egotistical fears by pretending to be too intellectual to pander for an online audience.

When I started this site, I attracted a sizable audience of people who read me every day for my political content. I had a lot of libertarians and a surprising number of conservatives who followed me religiously.

But I soon got tired of doing the sort of simplistic things which attracted that kind of audience. I wasn’t making enough money at it to care about losing my small bit of revenue. So about seven years or so ago, I switched directions entirely.

I just wrote whatever I personally needed to say. I didn’t care whether I had an audience. If a few thousand people constantly showed up to read what I wanted to talk about, it didn’t matter one way or the other to me.

So am I going to be a bargain-basement clown — in the rhetorical sense — who’s just pandering to people who want to be entertained? Or am I going to do something that’s serious enough to satisfy my intellectual integrity and attract a weekly audience in the dozens? (If I’m lucky.) And if I do that, am I going to complain about how stupid the public is — since they’re not going to rush to watch that product?

I’ve recorded sample scripts which lean in each direction — and I’m honestly not sure what the answer is. Nothing yet feels quite right. So that’s what’s taking so long for me to launch the channel — because I only get to launch once. If I blow the launch, I’m unlikely to achieve my business goals.

I understand now why a good operation of this sort needs multiple people. It would help to have the right business partner to be making these decisions with — because I have too much ego at stake to know when I’m making rational decisions.

For most of you, it makes absolutely no difference whether this works or not. Even if you personally know me and you want me to succeed, it won’t change your life.

For me, though, it could be life-changing. It could let me let me shift to full-time media production, which could lead to other opportunities. It could greatly increase my income and set me up for much more after that. And it could give me a flexible business which I could operate from anywhere in the world.

If this works, I could do it from Birmingham or Tbilisi, Georgia, or Cuenca, Ecuador, or a thousand other places. This would give me flexibility and options, especially in the face of the societal collapse which I expect in my lifetime.

I’m doing something far outside my comfort zone. I’m trying to balance a commercial pursuit with intellectual integrity. I’m doing something that scares my ego. And I’m doing something which could change my life — if I can make it work.

This is why I’m struggling. This is why it’s taking so long to launch. And this is why it’s harder to be the blindly confident risk-taker that I’ve always been for all my projects in the past.

This one matters. And I’m struggling to get it right.

Share on Social Networks

If you have problems with high blood pressure, I’d like to encourage you to consider making serious changes to your diet. There might be some people who don’t have any choice but to start taking prescription medications for high blood pressure, but I’d like to tell you that I have completely eliminated my issue by eliminating all sugar and almost all carbohydrates. (A couple of months ago, my blood pressure hit 185/144, which was dangerously high — considered stage 3 hypertension.) By completely changing my eating habits, I’m down 22 pounds and my blood pressure is now in the “ideal” range — without taking any medication. In addition, I sleep better and I have more energy. Getting away from the sugar-laden mess that we generally refer to as “highly processed food” has been a life-changer for me. Now my challenge is to avoid slipping back into old habits — by eating in the dangerous ways that almost everyone in our society has come to see as normal.

When I first heard about this, I thought it must be satire. When I discovered it was real, I was appalled, but I still thought it must be a one-time thing from some nutty activist. But it turns out it’s the latest bit of pandering to a bunch of far-left activists who believe that a man can become a woman if he decides to claim he’s a woman. As everybody knows, men have prostate glands. Women do not. Period. End of story. Men can get prostate cancer. Women cannot. But political activists are so eager to pretend that a man claiming to be a “trans woman” is really a woman that they are insisting that “women” be included in public health messages about the issue. This is nothing but political virtue-signaling. If you’re a man, you know which parts you have. You know that you ought to be screened. Nobody is made any safer by dragging far-left gender ideology into simple medical reality.

Every time someone tries to tighten requirements around the use of absentee ballots, I hear screams from Democrats and others on the political left that such efforts are nothing but “suppression of black voters.” These protests have never made sense to me, especially because it’s never been a secret that absentee ballot fraud goes on all the time in certain areas. (Everybody knew it when I worked in politics.) The people who engage in such fraud are rarely caught — often because the local political establishment approves of the crime — but a Democrat who won a primary election in Clay County, Alabama, last year has pleaded guilty to this sort of cheating. Terry Andrew Heflin was running for a place on the Clay County Commission. He was caught ordering seven absentee ballots in the names of various voters and sending them to his post office box — after which he used the ballots to vote absentee for himself seven time. Did he have other people cast additional fraudulent ballots? We’ll never know. But in a primary in which he was able to win with only 141 votes, it wouldn’t take many fraudulent votes to change the election. The next time you hear “civil rights activists” claim that it’s just “voter suppression” to hurt blacks which is at the root of efforts to stop this fraud, remember Terry Heflin. If you care about fair and honest elections, ballot security and voter identity should matter to you.

A state legislator in Maine has been stripped of the ability to speak in the state Legislature — and her votes are not being counted on legislative issues — all because she made a truthful social media post. Rep. Laurel Libby (R-Auburn, Maine) opposes allowing boys to compete against girls’ teams in school athletics and she’s become known for making an issue of it. On Feb. 17, she posted on Facebook about a recent example that she found outrageous. She posted side-by-side photos of a boy named John who competed last year in a state track event and won fifth place against other boys two years ago — and a photo of the same boy (now called Katie) who won first place in the same event this year against girls. Whether you find this outrageous or not, Libby is clearly being honest and truthful about the objective facts of an issue of public importance. But the state Legislature censured her. Democrats decreed that she could not speak in the House and that her votes would not count on legislation — until she apologized for the outrage of telling the truth. She refused and her constituents have been unrepresented in the state House since then. The people who promote this ideology are out of touch with reality and won’t rest until they force the rest of us to join them in this delusion. But even if you agree with “trans” ideology, you should be appalled at this heavy-handed attack on political speech.

The late Steve Jobs was at the center of our culture’s transition from analog to digital. He co-founded Apple Computer. He led the team that revolutionized personal computing with the first Macintosh. As CEO of Apple, he led the development of the iPhone and later the iPad. You would think the children of such a man would be surrounded by technology. But Jobs and his wife Laureen didn’t let their children use iPads. Their home had few screens of any kind. Even though Jobs spent most of his time developing and selling Macs and iPhones and iPads, he was home with his wife and children for dinner when he was in town. The family ate together at a simple wooden table in their kitchen — and there were no digital devices or focus on popular culture. Instead, he’s said to have guided his family toward deep discussions of art, philosophy and education — with no iPads to be found. If the man who guided the development of such products chose a different path for his own children, does that suggest that his digital experience taught him that children need human connection, not screens? And does it suggest the possibility that we might be better off if we made the same choice for our families?

Related Posts