The real threshold for short videos is not shooting: what professionals need to practice is not performance, but knowledge translation
Recently I watched Chen Xiuping’s video “The most common mistake for newbies in short video?” 16 key tips solved at once! (opens in a new tab)〉, I originally thought it would be an instructional video talking about equipment, editing and speaking skills. Unexpectedly, after watching it, what I really remembered was not whether to use the front or rear camera, nor how to add subtitles?
What remains in my mind is a more fundamental question:
Why are some people obviously very professional but never able to produce content that people are willing to read?
Of course, this problem does not only exist in short video.
Writing articles, doing podcasts, running online courses or running personal brands, or even standing on the podium, we will actually encounter the same dilemma: we have a lot of knowledge, but this knowledge may not successfully cross the threshold of being understood, noticed, and needed.
From this perspective, short videos are not another brand-new content form. It just amplifies the problems that already exist in content dissemination and make them more obvious.
The most common mistake experts make is to start from “what they want to say”
Chen Xiuping mentioned that it is often very difficult for experts to make short videos.
One reason is that experts are used to talking about things they think are important, rather than what the audience is willing to stop and listen to at the moment.
For example, a business management expert may want to talk about equity systems, performance appraisals, corporate governance and organizational culture; a marketing consultant may want to explain brand positioning, customer journeys and conversion funnels; a researcher may want to start with theoretical definitions and literature context.
Well, these are certainly important. The problem is, being important doesn’t mean the audience wants to see it now.
This is also the most common mismatch in many professional content: the creator stands in the position of “knowledge provider”, but the audience stands in the position of “attention consumer”. What the creator thinks of is completeness, rigor and depth; what the audience first judges is:
- What does this have to do with me?
- Why should I watch it now?
- What problems can be solved after reading this?
Therefore, the first lesson of short videos is not to teach knowledge in a shorter time, but to rediscover the entrance to knowledge.
For example, instead of talking directly about sunk costs, why not talk about: “Why do many people dare not downsize their wedding even though they know it has already exceeded the budget?”
Instead of talking about differential pricing, it’s better to ask: “Why do different people see different prices when they open Uber for the same ride?”
Rather than talking about the impact of generative AI on organizational processes, it is better to ask: “Why do some companies use AI and their employees are busier?”
Professionalism has not disappeared, it has just changed its entrance. This is exactly the ability that I think knowledge-based creators need to practice most: not to make their majors shallower, but to make their entrances lower.
Lowering the threshold of understanding does not mean sacrificing professionalism
Many experts resist short videos because they are afraid of speaking too simply.
They worry that once the content is adapted to life, stories, or even entertainment, it will appear unprofessional; they are also afraid of being criticized by their peers, thinking that they are just following topics and chasing traffic, without real academic or ideological depth.
This concern is not unreasonable.
We all have to admit that today’s content market does have a lot of exaggerated titles, one-sided discussions and oversimplified knowledge. When everything is condensed into “three moves”, “five steps” and “secrets you don’t know”, the complex world can easily be compressed into cheap answers.
However, the other extreme is also worthy of vigilance: some people regard others’ inability to understand as proof of professionalism.
I have always believed that true expertise is not just about knowing more than others, but also being able to choose appropriate ways of expression according to different objects.
For colleagues, you can talk about complete theories; for business executives, you can talk about the impact of decision-making; for ordinary workers, you can start from life scenes; for short video viewers, you must first provide a question that is enough to make people stop.
This is not to reduce the value of knowledge, but to respect the context of communication.
A short video is not a paper, nor is it a three-hour course. It’s more like a door. The responsibility of the door is not to show all the details of the entire house, but to make people want to walk in.
(opens in a new tab)
The content is not invented from scratch, but the answer is found from market signals.
The film also mentioned a point that impressed me a lot: don’t keep guessing what the audience wants to see, the answer actually already exists.
Creators can go to YouTube to search for keywords in the same field, and then observe which topics receive higher views; they can also study comments, search suggestions, community discussions and FAQs to understand what the market is really paying attention to?
This method seems ordinary, but it highlights an important content concept:
Creation is not only expression, but also research.
Many people think of content creation as inspirational work, as if sitting at their desk every day should automatically bring up new topics in their minds. In fact, mature content work is closer to a continuously operating intelligence system.
We can observe: What do people search for over and over again? Which titles are particularly effective for videos in the same genre? What questions appear in the message area? What questions have been asked all the time but no one has clarified them? Which old video’s traffic suddenly increased again due to new events?
Admittedly, these are signals left by the market.
Especially now with AI, the cost of content research has dropped significantly. We can use AI to help organize popular videos, summarize comments and find common problems, and even break down a long video into sections that can be understood by different audiences.
However, AI can help sort out signals, but it cannot make the final judgment for us. Because data can only tell us what someone has read, but it cannot fully answer: Is this topic suitable for me? Can I offer a different perspective? Will this traffic bring the right people? Does it have anything to do with the positioning I want to establish in the long term?
Therefore, I would not understand popular content research as plagiarism and popular content, but rather as market field research. The reason why we study what others have done is to avoid working behind closed doors; what we really need to do is to add our own experience, judgment and stance.
Lowest cost, not cheap, but to increase the number of experiments
Chen Xiuping repeatedly emphasized that short videos should start with the lowest cost: a mobile phone, simple spoken broadcast, and quick editing. Don’t buy cameras, lights, microphones, or even form a complete team before starting.
I very much agree with this point of view.
But I think where the lowest cost is really important is not just saving money, but increasing the number of experiments. Because content production is essentially a job with high uncertainty. You don’t know which topic will be popular, and you don’t know which statement will resonate with the audience. Even if it has been successful in the past, it does not mean that it can be completely replicated next time.
Since the results cannot be guaranteed in advance, the most reasonable way is not to put all resources on one film, but to conduct more tests at a lower cost. Suppose a video costs 20,000 yuan and takes two weeks to complete. Failure will be very heartbreaking, and it is easy for people to doubt that they are not suitable for making short videos. But if a video only takes thirty minutes to complete, then poor traffic is just a test result.
Having said that, this is actually very similar to Vibe Coding.
We no longer spend half a year building a product that we think is perfect. Instead, we first create a minimum viable version and let real users tell us: where there is demand, where modifications are needed, and where no one cares at all.
Therefore, the low-cost strategy of short videos can be understood as a kind of content MVP. Shoot it first and then make corrections based on market feedback. Only by establishing production volume can judgment be accumulated; only by having enough samples can the data be of analytical value.
The first 30 videos for beginners, what really matters is not the traffic
There is a piece of advice in the video that I think is worth remembering by creators: novices should not get obsessed with data analysis too early.
Many people shoot two or three videos and then start studying the completion rate, dwell time, bounce rate and interaction rate. When I see the numbers are not good, I quickly come to the conclusion:
- I’m not suitable for filming.
- My topic no one wants to see.
- Short video bonuses are all scams.
But the problem is that two or three videos are simply not enough to form an effective judgment.
The biggest variable in the novice stage is often not the title, but the creator’s own basic skills that are not yet stable. Maybe the speech is too fast this time and the next one starts too slowly; the composition is not good this time and the expression is stiff next time; sometimes the title is good but the title is not clear.
When there are too many variables and too few samples, the data can easily become just noise.
Therefore, the video proposes that the first 30 be divided into three groups, with each group testing a different type of theme. This method is great because it turns the emotional question of “should I continue doing this?” into a mini-experiment.
For example, in my major, it can be designed as follows: the first 10 sessions talk about AI tools and implementation; the middle 10 sessions talk about content marketing and personal branding; the last 10 sessions talk about work and business trends in the AI era.
After completing the shooting of 30 videos, compare: Which group has higher traffic? Which group brings more collections and shares? Which group attracts more precise inquiries? What kind of content sounds most natural to me? Which type of content is most easily connected to courses, consultants, or products?
At this time, the data begins to have decision-making value. In other words, the purpose of the first 30 videos for beginners is not to prove their success, but to establish their own content coordinate system.
Traffic is not an asset, relationships are
In this video, I think the most commercially valuable section is the distinction between public domain traffic and private domain traffic.
Views on Facebook, Instagram, YouTube or TikTok are traffic allocated to you by the platform. If the algorithm is willing to recommend, you have a chance to be seen in large numbers; once the algorithm changes, your reach may drop instantly.
What can really be accumulated in the long term is email (opens in a new tab), LINE official account, membership system, own website, and the trust relationship established with the audience. This is also what many short video creators tend to overlook.
They chase views every day without planning the next step. Where will the audience go after watching the film? Want to subscribe to the newsletter? Want to download a toolkit? Want to join the community? Want to use a free AI tool? Want to read the full article? Or will it just slide away and never matter again?
If there is no undertaking mechanism, no matter how large the traffic is, it may just be fireworks. It appears bright and disappears just as quickly.
Taking my own content system as an example, short video should not be an isolated product, but should be the entrance to the entire knowledge IP system.
A short video can be linked to a complete article; the article can guide readers to subscribe to the e-newsletter; the e-newsletter can provide tools and cases; the tools can allow users to experience the method; and finally they can enter courses, workshops or consulting services.
Therefore, the task of short video is not necessarily to directly close the deal, but to make strangers willing to take a step closer.
Distribution across the entire network does not mean that every platform must operate in the same way.
Chen Xiuping suggested that after a video is completed, it can be distributed to platforms such as Facebook, Instagram, YouTube, TikTok and Threads, and then observe from the data which platform performs better?
Well, this is indeed a pragmatic approach.
But I would like to add one more point: Network-wide distribution is a testing strategy, not a final strategy.
The same video can be tested across platforms first, but the user context, content rhythm and interactive culture of different platforms are not exactly the same. For example, Facebook may be more suitable for story-based, social, and practical content; Instagram may be more suitable for visuals, characters, and a sense of life; YouTube Shorts may be more likely to connect long videos and search traffic; Threads may be suitable for extending opinions and real-time discussions.
In the early stage, you can publish multiple articles at once to reduce content costs; but when the data begins to show that a certain platform has gathered an audience that is more suitable for you, you should further develop platform-native content.
So a really mature approach might be:
One core point of view, multiple content forms.
The same topic can be written as an article first, and then divided into short videos, picture cards, e-newsletters, podcasts and community articles. They do not copy each other, but rearrange the entrance and narrative rhythm according to the characteristics of the platform.
This is also the content capitalization I have been practicing: not creating from scratch every day, but letting a good idea continue to derive different forms of value.
Short video is not a performance course, but a set of knowledge translation skills
After watching this video, my biggest gain is to re-understand the essence of short videos.
Many people think that making short videos means being outgoing, good at acting, being funny, and even deliberately creating an exaggerated persona. But for professionals, the ability that short videos really need may not be performance, but translation:
- Abstract Translation: Translate abstract theories into life problems
- Complex Translation: Translate complex knowledge into clear judgments
- Long Translation: Translate long content into an entry worth stopping at.
- Experience Translation: Translate personal experiences into stories that audiences can relate to
- Relationship Translation: Translate one-time traffic into long-term relationships
These five translation abilities are the real basic skills behind short videos.
Equipment will improve, editing will be automated, and AI can even help us generate subtitles, edit scenes, and rewrite scripts (opens in a new tab). In the future, it can also help generate different versions of short videos.
When the threshold for audio and video production continues to drop, what is truly scarce is no longer the ability to make a film, but: Do you have a point of view worth spreading? Can you understand the audience’s situation? Can you explain something important in a short time? Can you turn your attention back to your own content and business systems?
Don’t rush to become an Internet celebrity, first become an expert who is easy to understand
I think that for most professionals, the goal of making short videos is not necessarily to become an Internet celebrity with millions of fans.
What we really need may just be for more of the right people to know what we are doing, believe that we can solve problems, and think of us when needed. Therefore, you don’t need to pursue high-end equipment from the beginning, nor do you need to demand that every video you make must be a hit.
More importantly, build a system that works over the long term:
Choose topics from market issues, package them professionally with life situations, continue testing at the lowest cost, and then bring public attention back to your own website, e-newsletter, community and products.
Short videos do not replace articles, courses, or in-depth content.
It just stands at the entrance and says something to strangers on your professional behalf:
This matter may concern you. Would you like to take a minute to listen to me?
And when the other party is willing to stop, the real content relationship is about to begin.
🚀 Want to more systematically “translate” your professional skills into content assets that the audience can understand and are willing to pay for? Welcome to solo.tw (opens in a new tab) to learn about “AI Content Production System Workshop”. This is what I have been doing in the past few years: turning a major into a complete content system that can penetrate articles, short videos, e-newsletters, courses and consulting services.
Further reading
- The threshold of audio and video has not disappeared, it has just moved: in the era of AI editing, the place where you should invest your time has changed
- Short Video・Small Lucky Economics: The Marketing Revolution of Instant Healing
- Understand these five things and you will see through any business: a one-person company does not have to spend 2 million to study for an MBA
- Dan Koe: To build a one-person company business model, how to productize yourself?
Next step
Bring this topic to your team
Vista Cheng speaks and runs workshops on AI workflows, writing and content systems for companies, schools and public agencies.
