I have strong opposition to the idea that science can usefully be communicated by exchanging video clips. Although one gets a good personal flavour from a scientist talking, one does not have the ability to cross-check through the "document" and refer back to key sections. A Video is generally not indexed so one cannot jump to specific sections, and the "meat" of the video is often a nice sounding, but poorly proven "factoid".

In contrast, a scientific paper MUST be well constructed, well argued, fully documented, properly laid-out and indexed. The reader can check that the conclusions (the "meat") are properly supported by logical and mathematical arguments that demonstrate the plausibility of the basic thesis, and show that obvious alternative models have been checked and disproven adequately.

I save scientific papers in an archive. I don't save You-tube or other videos. They are, in my opinion, purely ephemeral entertainment or education, rather than reference material.

Thanks for summarising ther key points for me.