How PragerU Can Live Up To Its Potential

Bo Brusco | June 20, 2020

"Dennis Prager" by Gage Skidmore is licensed under CC BY-SA 2.0

PragerU

PragerU is one of the most prominent Conservative voices on the net. Founded in 2009, the company has flourished under Dennis Prager’s leadership, garnering a massive following. Today their site is reporting over 3.5 billion video views, while their YouTube channel has over 2.5 million subscribers. One of the components that makes PragerU such a cyber force to be reckoned with is their ability to craft concise, informative videos. These videos usually feature a sort of expert in a field, authoritative voice, or celebrity personality, who succinctly explains a topic while simple animations serve as effective visual aids. One of my favorite examples is a video titled “Don’t Follow Your Passion,” in which Mike Rowe, celebrity personality from Dirty Jobs and Deadliest Catch, offers a practical counter argument to the whimsical advice of always following your dreams. 

The Premise

For as genius a platform as it is, PragerU continues to perform below its potential. Even though there is much to admire, the truth of the matter is that PragerU is currently serving as merely another team member on the right side of America’s political tug-of-war. The rising political tensions in America does not go unnoticed by its citizens. As of 2019, 85% of Americans think that the tone and nature of political debate has become more negative and disrespectful. Platforms like PragerU have only added to this tension; and with pieces that bluntly attack the left and reinforce the right, PragerU seems to be wasting their efforts in winning over those who are already on their side. 

The goal of any politically based organization should be to persuade their ideological opposition into agreement with them, and this is accomplished through education, debate, and discourse. It is akin to what Thomas Jefferson said: Educate and inform the whole mass of the people. Enable them to see that it is their interest to preserve peace and order, and they will preserve them. Assuming that its goal is to win the left over into ideological alignment by convincing them of the error of their ways, it is fair to say that PragerU is living below its potential. 

Underachieving

A prime example of PragerU’s underachievement is a video titled “The Left Ruins Everything.” In this video, Mr. Prager claims that the left is ruining freedom, beauty, reason, the family, economic-well being, and goodness. In the introduction he says, “Leftism destroys everything it touches.” The content of this video is not the issue. Mr. Prager makes some valid points about some potentially negative effects progressive ideas have had on traditional society (I am definitely not here to debate either case); however, the issue is in the presentation. Instead of presenting these ideas as genuine concerns he is bringing to the attention of his opposition, he is flagrantly attacking them. 

This is a common occurrence throughout PragerU’s content, and the following collection of quotes seems to support this claim: 

“The more Democrats win the less freedom you will have. That’s not an opinion, that is a fact.”

“The left constantly poisons young minds with angry diatribes about ‘systemic racism,’ microaggressions, and white privilege.”

“Here’s the thing about the left: it only destroys. It doesn’t build.”

“Fighting the left is the equivalent of saving America at this time, and much of the world.”

“We really have two different countries today: Left and Right.”

“Leftism is a religion of self-loathing.”

As well as these video titles:

• When the Left Changes Something it Makes it Worse

• The Left wants to Keep Racism Alive

• The Left Ruins Everything

• Leftism Makes People Mean

• The Left Cheapens Evil

• Beware of Leftist Hysteria

• How the Left Justifies Bad Behavior 

(All the above quotes and titles can be found via PragerU’s website, YouTube Channel, or Instagram account).

With this kind of approach, it’s not difficult to see how PragerU is failing to achieve their goal. The Leader of Behavioral Economics and Behavioral Insights Initiative at Boston Consulting Group, Julia Dhar, explained that, “The way we reach people is by finding common ground. It’s by separating ideas from identity, and being genuinely open to persuasion.” Finding common ground is a significant mark PragerU is missing. Instead of seeking to educate those who they should see as needing it the most, PragerU too often aims to attack their opposition. The presentation of their content is designed to only be palatable for those who are already on Team Prager, and is so apparently repulsive and offensive to those who are not. This, of course, leads to their opposition becoming the demographic least likely to view their content, while those who are preemptively inclined to agree with PragerU, and share their same values, become their most predominant audience members; and it is a minuscule achievement to persuade those who need no convincing.   

Combat Versus Conversion

In war, this tactical approach serves us well; we seek to diminish the opposing forces by assaulting them, but that’s not how it works with ideas. The war of ideas bears a closer resemblance to religious missionary work. Instead of seeking to attack and destroy, we must seek to convince and convert in order to win. This contrast illustrates PragerU’s current ineffective strategy, and how they can change their approach in the future.

PragerU is currently following this military model in regards to how they disseminate and present their information. The claims, reasons, and evidence come out the barrel of their platform like bullets. And if their opposition doesn’t take the hits directly (which is less likely the case, as previously mentioned) then they distribute ammunition to their followers, the majority of whom will only know how to shoot said information at their opposition as well (as the site makes it clear who its ideological enemies are).

This is ineffective. If their goal is to make their principles, truths, and beliefs the prevailing ideology of the country, then they ought to be seeking to convert their opposition, not attack them. PragerU’s success rate (if their success is measured by winning their opposition over to their side) would significantly increase if they followed a mission model as opposed to one more suited for a battlefield. Missionaries seek to help nonbelievers believe. That takes a lot of mental (and of course spiritual) maneuvering. Missionaries have to share their message in a way that helps others see what they’re missing out on, and how much their lives would improve if they would adhere to the truth being shared.

Imagine if you were a Christian, and some missionaries of another faith knocked on your door and the first thing they said to you was, “This is why Christians ruin everything.” You’d sooner slam the door than feel inclined to invite them in to continue their message about how your faith is not only wrong, but is also ruining the world.

To Be Fair

To be fair, PragerU is by no means the only political platform that behaves like this. There are plenty others on the right and a multitude on the left (and to be fair, PragerU tries to distinguish a difference between “Liberals” and “Leftists,” but how would anyone to the left of them know that distinction when the overwhelming majority of their audience are those to the right?). How many times have you come across a video on YouTube or Facebook with a title like “So and so DESTROYS such and such a person” or “Timmy Tommy DECIMATES inferior human being?” It has become a sort of political pop-culture phenomenon, and none of it is at all productive. At its best, this type of content serves as a one-stop destination for people who already agree with the bias on display, but view these videos to confirm their biases and get the dopamine release that comes with it; and at its worst, these sound bites and videos only serve their creators who prey on—and profit off of—those who they know are already inclined to believe what is being shared at the expense of increasing the polarization between political tribes. The way these platforms are functioning right now is only emboldening each side, not reconciling the discord. 

So why single out PragerU? Because perhaps more than any other political platform right now, PragerU is best equipped to actually make a difference. They have an extraordinary team of brilliant minds that have pertinent wisdom to share. They have their marketing and production down to a science. They have a ginormous audience. If they can find a way to invite those who stand in their ideological opposition to consider what they have to say, instead of attacking them, imagine what they could accomplish. And even if they didn’t start winning people over, if they were successful in merely reaching those whose minds they actually wished would change, they would at least begin to calm the stormy waters of division we are currently treading because as it stands right now, neither side knows how to find that shared reality that Dhar talked about; they only know how to fight and despise each other. 

Consider This

An additional thought in regards to this war of ideas comes from a question asked at one of Ben Shapiro's speeches in 2019. During the Q&A segment, a man asked Shapiro: As a conservative, I think that if we’re going to win the war of ideas we need to adopt some more nuanced views on issues that are important to people instead of being dismissive—which I think we are sometimes—[...] we all have unconscious biases based on things like race, age, and gender [...]. Don’t we need to check our biases by trying to do better at judging each person individually, and not by their group identity? I cannot find the name of this man, but I am encouraged that people like him exist. Someone who knows to which tribe he belongs but isn’t blind to how divided we have become. He has the courage to ask one of his side’s leaders to consider a different approach that would be more effective at actually winning this war of ideas—actually helping those “nonbelievers” to believe.

And this is the same invitation I extend to PragerU: to enact a winning strategy in this war of ideas by inviting those who don’t share your world view to consider your perspective. Instead of telling your tribe that the other tribe is dangerous, invite that other tribe to reflect on the potential consequences of their behavior. Instead of being dismissive, invite your opposition to elaborate by engaging in productive dialogue. Find a way to not condemn all the individuals who are part of a group that disagrees with you. Ultimately, I invite PragerU to live up to its potential because we need them to be the best version of themselves right now. And I invite every political platform from all across the spectrum to do the same; seek to actually reach those who disagree with you, and reason together to bring about the change you want to see in this country.