The Worst Ploy to increase Runtime

If there is one thing I hate, it's when writers write with no intention.

One writing style I really dislike is when there’s no real plot—just endless buildup with the substance of a used coke can. Empty.

I'm talking about those fake celebrity videos on YouTube that trick viewers—especially kids or older people—into thinking something real happened, when it’s clearly fictional. You watch the whole thing and learn nothing. It’s redundant, feels lazy, and frustrating. If I click a video to find out what happened, just tell me. You can reveal it upfront, in the middle, or through action—we’ll still keep watching.

Shorts are different. They’re quick, direct, and instantly entertaining. But with long-form videos, I clicked by choice—why wouldn’t I want to watch the whole thing?

In these videos, there is no story. For example, a video title says, “Look what Selena Gomez did,” so you click, and the entire video's narration keeps repeating variations of "what she did was shocking; to the crowd, what happened was unbelievable; in the eye of the court, what she said was unfathomable. What happened?" Different words, same meaning without ever telling you what actually happened until the very end.

Saying “you’re flabbergasted, the crowd was shocked, even stunned” once is fine. But stretching that same phrase across twenty minutes "the crowd was confused by the intensity of her words," never mentioning what she said, continuing with "...the crowd was in shock at the buildup of tension, the crowd couldn’t believe it," is annoying.

It's a bad ploy to increase watch time because it wastes my time and your effort.

When it comes to books and fiction, taste is subjective. I love descriptiveness. What matters is using description beautifully. You can vividly describe a character or setting without circling the same idea.

This is not a complaint about being descriptive. The issue is repetition. Saying "the crowd was in shock" is descriptive. Saying it over & again in unique ways is filler.

That’s the problem with videos like, “Look at what Selena Gomez did.” You click expecting news, but you never get the news. Instead, you hear endless variations of "what she did was unfathomable," without ever being told what she actually said or did for 12 minutes.

If you keep repeating something happened for five minutes without explaining what happened, You're withholding the substance to pad the runtime.

It makes no sense to be this lazy in writing because it takes time to write like this for 6 minutes and it's so weird because if they wanted to be lazy, They could have gone to Chat GPT and done THIS (click here for the example) to get this:

The camel lowered its long neck toward the ground, lips devouring corn. Corn wasn’t part of its usual desert diet, but it seemed pleased, nostrils flaring as it gathered every last cob.

Sunlight caught the coarse fur along its jaw while it ate, and kernels clung to its mouth before being swept away by the tongue. Simple hunger met by a simple meal. The camel paused now and then, lifting its head to look around with calm, heavy-lidded eyes.

Just as the camel settled into its slow, contented chewing, a sudden rustle broke the calm. Its head shot up to check for predators. But... Hmm... Nothing was there. Before it could lower its head again, the corn was gone—snatched away in a quick blur of movement.

Once the camel looked down, The camel froze, confused by the empty ground where the kernels had been moments before.It lifted its head higher this time, ears twitching, eyes scanning the area with mild disbelief. A low, puzzled huff escaped its nostrils as it took a few heavy steps forward, inspecting the dirt as if the cob might magically return. Finding the cob gone, the camel sighed, shifting its weight and blinking against the sun. The corn is a stolen memory now.

With a few edits, It took less time to make something with actual events (if not an itty bitty plot) than it would take to write the redundant, mindless jargon I saw in some of those videos trying to profit off of the diddy case.

While I DO NOT wish for you to use Chat GPT for your writing as I want you to improve on your own, This is just an example of how much time THEY POSSIBLY TOOK babbling, being intentionally lazy, and how much time they could have taken if they wanted to be even lazier.

Ironically, pointless runtime padding doesn’t even align with the YouTube algorithm anymore. Shorts are promoted far more than long-form content, and long videos like this are potentially missing out on massive amounts of views. Most views come from new people who aren't subbed to these channels, so dragging things out drives people away. I shut off videos full of jargon with 0% plot, rather than videos that ACTUALLY tell a story.

Another style I dislike is repetitive glazing. Glazing can be good writing in moderation—you can hype God, angels, or characters—but you still need to tell us what they actually did. When glazing is repeated across multiple videos in the same way, it becomes annoyingly cliché. This happens a lot with angel fiction.

The narration keeps sounding dramatically mystical like this (CLICK HERE for example) while endlessly repeating the same glaze without delivering the plot or simply just taking an oddly long time doing so.

They'll get to the point most of the time, but I get impatient and want to cut to the chase very quickly. The plot is interesting, though, that's why I'm annoyed & antsy. I'm not sure if The issue is that an AI wrote the script for those videos; as I've never seen an AI put out such ugly jargon, but it's DEFINITELY possible.

It's not as bad as the celebrity gossip type fiction. They give you constant hype with zero payoff.

It does in a slight way mirror those fake celebrity videos when it comes to how repetitive it can get.

In angel fiction, You don’t need to repeat how awe-inspiring an angel is in ten different ways. Say it once, maybe twice—but if you repeat it, add new context or meaning.

For example:

• “Demetrius was one of the most powerful angels in Heaven.”

• “Even Gabriel couldn’t defeat him in battle.”

Both describe power, but they do different jobs. The first sets context; the second shows scale.

What annoys me is: "you couldn’t fathom his power, his power was unimaginable, they saw that his power was absolute, the hosts saw that his power was beyond comprehension."

The same sentence has been rewritten four times in four different ways. It killed the momentum. You can describe an angel as gnarly without turning it into endless praise when it's time to show action; Show us why he's cool!

Another one is delayed repetitiveness.

This style of writing is present in those stories that are like "A man cheated on his wife, this is what she did next," Or "She got pregnant, you'll NEVER believe how!" In those square website ads. Not the ones on YouTube, but on those news websites before AI was even a popular thing.

Example:

Diana had gone through an event so awful that no one could describe it.

What was the event?

One day she woke up in the morning and she was looking out her window. There were tens of thousands of cars outside.

What could they possibly mean?

The cars came and began to drive into her house.

What could this possibly be?

They broke through her window. They broke through her door.

What could have possibly happened? Why?

Like bro, just say the car drove through her house. They broke through the windows and doors. And then immediately explain the government was going to kidnap her and use her for an experiment. Now, that plot didn't make sense, it's just an example of "GET TO THE CHASE!" Me asking you to doesn't mean the plot's bad. If I ask, it means I'm curious, like the idea of the plot & want to see it immediately.

It's not necessary to ask those questions repetitively.

Many stories have been written like this:

"Diana had gone through an event so awful that no one could describe it.

One day she woke up in the morning, looking out her window. There were tens of thousands of cars outside.

One of The cars crashed into her mansion in an accident, breaking her windows, and now she no longer has a functional front door.

They don't seem to care. The car pulls out of the hole he created in her wall, a man exits from the vehicle, then bursts into Diana's room with his gun drawn on Diana.

Suddenly, there's a blindfold on her face and another man grabbing her, forcing her in a car to a government facility. In the car, She doesn't know where she's going, and no one cares to tell her. To them, she's just a tool..."

...And have gotten millions of dollars, readers, movie adaptations, and TV shows. Mangas written like that get adapted into Anime all the time.

Books like The Land of Narnia, The Earthly Angels, and Books by Cathy Glass all have a straightforward writing style and are very popular.

The Land of Narnia has a popular movie adaptation with sequels, despite its Christian origin with the Lion LITERALLY being Jesus Christ in the form of a Lion in the Book.

Many People in America are becoming hostile to Christianity, yet the straightforward writing in this book is still making rounds in Atheist, Christian and even other religious circles because The Land of Narnia is a good film & book! No, you don't have to ask "What happened?" After every 5 paragraphs in this random fake news article to keep us engaged.

Here's my question: "How do you not know we can stay engaged without you doing that, got dang it!?"