In popular music reaction videos, performers on YouTube—called “creators”—record their reactions to popular music, filming themselves as they listen to music recordings and watch music videos. The profitability and appeal of popular music reaction videos can be explained by a quality I call reactivity. Reactivity describes the approach that creators take to listening, as they heighten and exaggerate their affective experience of music media. Reactivity also describes their goals for creating these reaction videos, which they hope will provoke subsequent reactions among viewers. Reactions among their viewers translate into more views, shares, and ultimately more power for the creators. By drawing on observations and interviews with nine creators, I demonstrate how reactivity can enable creators of color and queer creators to counter problematic and dominant forms of listening to popular music, while also enabling privileged creators to treat exploitative listening as a kind of virtuosic act of consumption.
AndrejevicM (2007) iSpy: Surveillance and Power in the Interactive Era. Lawrence, KS: University Press of Kansas.
3.
BenchHJBahlingBEstabrookN, et al. (2016) Screendance: learning, teaching, living. The International Journal of Screendance6: 189–196.
4.
BerlinerLS (2018) Producing Queer Youth: The Paradox of Digital Media Empowerment. New York: Routledge.
5.
BoellstorffTTLTaylorBNardiC, et al. (2012) Ethnography and Virtual Worlds: A Handbook of Method. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
6.
BurgessJGreenJ (2009) YouTube: Online Video and Participatory Culture. Malden, MA: Polity Press.
7.
ChengW (2012) Role-Playing toward a Virtual Musical Democracy in The Lord of the Rings Online. Ethnomusicology56(1): 31–62.
8.
ClissoldB (2004) Candid camera and the origins of reality TV: contextualizing a historical precedent. In: HolmesSJermynD (eds) Understanding Reality Television. New York: Routledge, pp. 33–34.
9.
DeFrantzTF (2004) The Black Beat Made Visible: Hip Hop Dance and Body Power. In: LepeckiA (ed.) Of the Presence, of the Body: Essays on Dance and Performance Theory. Middletown, CT: Wesleyan University Press, pp. 64–81.
10.
Dell’AntonioA (ed.) (2004) Beyond Structural Listening? Postmodern Modes of Hearing. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
11.
DeloriaP (1999) Playing Indian. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
12.
ErikssonMFleischerRJohanssonA, et al. (2019) Spotify Teardown: Inside the Black Box of Streaming Music. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
13.
GrossbergL (1986) Is there rock after punk?Critical Studies in Mass Communication3: 50–74.
14.
HagoodM (2019) Hush: Media and Sonic Self-control. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
15.
HarperP (2019) Unmute This: Circulation, Sociality, and Sound in Viral Media. PhD dissertation, Columbia University.
16.
HenriquesJ (2011) Sonic Bodies: Reggae Sound Systems, Performance Techniques, and Ways of Knowing. New York: Bloomsbury.
17.
HolmesSJermynD (2004) Understanding Reality Television. New York: Psychology Press, pp. 1–10.
18.
hooksb (ed.) (1992) Eating the other: desire and resistance. In: Black Looks: Race and Representation. Boston, MA: South End Press, pp. 21–39.
JenkinsHFordSGreenJ (2013) Spreadable Media: Creating Value and Meaning in Networked Culture. New York: New York University Press.
22.
KassabianA (2013) Ubiquitous Listening: Affect, Attention, and Distributed Subjectivity. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
23.
KimSY (2018) K-Pop Live: Fans, Idols, and Multimedia Performance. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
24.
MausM (1973) Techniques of the body. Economy and Society2(1): 70–88.
25.
MillerK (2012) Playing Along: Digital Games, YouTube, and Virtual Performance. New York: Oxford University Press.
26.
MillerK (2017) Playable Bodies: Dance Games and Intimate Media. New York: Oxford University Press.
27.
MorrisJ (2015) Selling Digital Music: Formatting Culture. Oakland, CA: University of California Press.
28.
MorrisonMD (2017) The sound(s) of subjection: constructing American popular music and racial identity through blacksound. Women & Performance: A Journal of Feminist Theory27(1): 13–24.
29.
NakamuraL (2001) Head hunting in cyberspace: identity tourism, Asian avatars and racial passing on the Web. The Women’s Review of Books18(5): 10–11.
30.
NobleSU (2018) Algorithms of Oppression: How Search Engines Enforce Racism. New York: New York University Press.
31.
PetersonRKernR (1996) Changing highbrow taste: from snob to omnivore. American Sociological Review61(5): 900–907.
32.
RettbergJ (2017) Hand signs for lip-syncing: the emergence of a gestural language on Musical.ly as a video-based equivalent to emoji. Social Media + Society3(4): 1–11.
RodmanG (2015) Waiting for the great leap forward: mixing pop, politics, and cultural studies. In: BennettAWaksmanS (eds) The SAGE Handbook of Popular Music. Washington, DC: SAGE, pp. 48–63.
35.
SaidE (1979) Orientalism. New York: Vintage Books.
36.
SenftT (2008) Camgirls: Celebrity and Community in the Age of Social Networks. Bern: Peter Lang Inc., International Academic Publishers.
StoeverJL (2016) The Sonic Color Line: Race & the Cultural Politics of Listening. New York: New York University Press.
39.
Stokel-WalkerC (2019) YouTubers: How YouTube Shook Up TV and Created a New Generation of Stars. Croydon: Canbury Press.
40.
SubotnikR (ed.) (1996) Toward a deconstruction of structural listening: a critique of Schoenberg, Adorno, and Stravinsky. In: Deconstructive Variations: Music and Reason in Western Society. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press, pp. 148–176.
41.
TaylorTL (2018) Watch Me Play: Twitch and the Rise of Game Live Streaming. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
42.
“The Top 500 Sites on the Web” (2019) Alexa.com. Available at: http://Alexa.com/topsites (accessed 11 December).
