Maybe if your business model includes putting things in an inconvenient format that could best be replaced by a bulleted list, you should rethink your business model.
If that's truly what you're doing, sure. If you can reduce a movie to its screenplay without losing value, that's probably what you should be doing. A recipe is a great complement to a cooking video, but reducing the value of a cooking video's value to the recipe is oversimplified.
I wish we'd go the other way, where free text content is complemented by paid-for audio or video commentary. But it has to be a very dull video for a bullet list to be a good replacement (and a bad bullet list to be able to capture what a good video production can convey).
> A recipe is a great complement to a cooking video, but reducing the value of a cooking video's value to the recipe is oversimplified.
There is a simple test to make here: is the complimentary recipe released to the viewer, so that they can read it conveniently and at their own pace? If the recipe is truly a complement to otherwise great cooking video, then releasing it is a no-brainer. If it's withheld, then one has to wonder why, and what the video publisher is afraid of.
Yeah no. There are probably amazing and insightful cooking videos out there, but the moment you intentionally withold the recipe unless people pay, you're using a disadvantage of the medium for rent-seeking.
A lot of this is actually caused by Google in benefiting observability of videos that are longer so they (google) can show more ads. You either get a 60 second short, or 10ish minutes. This leads content creators to stretch out their videos longer than they really should be.
