Structure 011: Hot Takes

^{Welcome to this week's issue of Structure. As always, one topic, with the goal of providing you some extra insight into the themes you see online. If you enjoyed feel free to subscribe below!}

The internet runs on content, we know. News articles, memes, viral Instagram posts, Twitter threads, and more nothing new here. People online (including yours truly) are trying their best to find their way through all of that content and get as many eyes as possible on their own content. Amongst the countless social media strategies focused on growth there is one short term method that never fails. Going viral. Not an easy strategy by any means, but an effective one. This search for virality often leads to various trends and approaches we’ll see online. Lots of throwing things at the wall and seeing what sticks.

Worst case? You delete a Tweet. Best case? You generate millions of impressions at the push of a button, and for a moment have more “internet” at your disposal than ever before.

Today we’ll be talking about hot takes. Specifically we’ll be breaking down what goes into them. A very common approach to “seeing what sticks” online is throwing around hot takes. Let’s get into it.

Why are takes getting hotter?

I already mentioned how content online often becomes a quest to achieve virality. Why? It’s a relatively low effort strategy. Instead of working to build an audience through consistent messaging or brand strategy, it’s a semi easy alternative to throw content out continuously in the hopes of something really catching on for a day or two. Then once you have that massive spike really just leaning into a few short growth periods and trying all over again.

Sports talkshows are a great example. We’ve all seen the clips online, these hosts spend less time talking about actual sports and more time blasting their extreme opinions into the void. Then, once a clip sticks and people feel the need to comment or share it with their friends due to how absurd it is, boom. Viral. Discussion starts online, the show likely sees a boost in viewership for a period and then it all dies down until the next clip sticks.

We see this trend in all sorts of categories now. Sports are a prime example, but politics, education, tech / startups, and more are all impacted as well. The big internet machine rewards viral content and at the same time “all publicity is good publicity right?”. Bold claims about court cases, victim blaming, company projections, and extremist political views all often fall into this category. Oftentimes people or companies are just looking for attention online. If they need to project a more extreme view point than their standard one to achieve virality they would rather do so and fix their image in front of that audience down the line. As long as their page is getting those impressions, they are happy to some extent, even if 50% of those impressions come from highly negative users.

The making of a hot take

What makes a hot take, let’s break it down. Anyone unfamiliar with my use of “hot take” , it just means an opinion that is vividly controversial or outrageous. Sometimes even to the point of stupidity.

It all starts with an opinion. This opinion for now is based in reality. Let’s start with a common sports take or a relatively polarizing political opinion. I’ll provide an example and build it as we go along.

Step 1: Michael Jordan is better at basketball than Lebron James

We have an acceptable argument that most people within the sports community will have an opinion on. This is just a take, not quite hot yet.

The next step is to add an extra layer, a supporting detail that boosts the surface value of an opinion. Also still grounded in reality, but instead of being a supporting detail used to formulate an argument, it becomes a foothold the entire take relies on.

Step 2: Michael Jordan is better at basketball than Lebron James and it isn’t close, Jordan has 6 rings.

There is some truth here, Jordan does have 6 rings, but basing an argument of who’s a better basketball player solely on this fact is flawed logic. A supporting detail becomes a foothold.

Finally, we take our supporting detail and abuse it. Instead of just supporting an entire opinion, it now becomes a weapon against all arguments. Grounded in fact, but blown wildly out of proportion. Half of the statement is reasonable, half is insanity, but both share the same supporting detail.

Final Product : Michael Jordan is better at basketball than Lebron James and it isn’t close, Jordan has 6 rings. Lebron doesn’t even crack the top 5 players all time, he doesn’t win enough.

Hot take.

Wrapping it up

The mix between reality and insanity in one holistic thought does a great job of garnering attention online. Using a realistic supporting point helps people feel the need to engage with it. There is no need to argue with an overtly incorrect opinion, but when that opinion is supported by real facts (facts that are then blown out of proportion) it provides more of an incentive for people to engage with it. This engagement then just furthers whatever engagement or impression goal the original poster is likely seeking. Regarding podcasts, talkshows, or political debates it encourages people to tune in. They want to hear what could possess someone to argue such an egregious opinion.

Hook. Line. Sinker.

Take a look online and note some of these hot takes as they appear in the wild. You’ll notice a lot of commonalities no matter what industry or topic is being discussed.

Till next time.

Braxton

Song of the Week

As a thank you for checking out this week's edition of Structure here's a song I've been listening to lately:

If you enjoyed, subscribe below and feel free to give me a shout on Twitter!