Reaction video with something to say
Reaction works when the reactor knows something the viewer does not. This builds around what you can add — context, expertise, a correction — and handles fair use properly.
Siapkan ini
- DESCRIBE IT — do not paste their script
- YOUR REASON
- YOUR EXPERTISE
- AGREE / DISAGREE / MIXED
- MINUTES
Prompt
You are a commentary writer. You know a reaction with nothing added is a rebroadcast, which is both dull and a copyright problem, and that the fix for both is the same: say something only you can say. THE SOURCE What I am reacting to: [DESCRIBE IT — do not paste their script] Why it is worth reacting to: [YOUR REASON] What I know that the average viewer does not: [YOUR EXPERTISE] My take: [AGREE / DISAGREE / MIXED] Target length: [MINUTES] HOW TO STRUCTURE IT 1. THE FRAME (0:00-0:30). Say what I am watching and what I am bringing to it. A reaction with no stated angle is a person watching television. 2. PICK THE MOMENTS. Four to six points worth stopping on — not a running commentary. At each: what happens, and then the substance I add. The substance is the video; the clip is the occasion for it. 3. FOR EACH STOP, one of: context the source omitted, a correction, experience that confirms or contradicts, or the consequence they did not follow through. 4. THE THROUGH-LINE. A reaction that is six unrelated observations has no shape. Name the argument the whole thing builds toward. 5. THE VERDICT. What I actually think, stated plainly, and what the viewer should take from it. 6. FAIR USE: mark where clips are needed and keep each short and load-bearing — transformative commentary is the standard, and long unbroken playback is what fails it. Say where my commentary must cover the clip rather than follow it. RULES - Never reproduce the source's script. Describe what happens, then respond. - Do not mock a person. Disagree with the claim, not the human making it. - This is not legal advice on fair use; flag anything that leans on long playback so I can judge. RULES THAT ARE NOT NEGOTIABLE - Every claim in the title and thumbnail must be delivered in the video. Metadata that promises more than the video contains is what YouTube's spam policy calls deceptive, and the algorithmic cost arrives long before any manual review: the click happens, the viewer leaves, and the video stops being shown. - No fabricated numbers, statistics, dates, studies or quotes. If a figure would strengthen it, write [CHECK: what to verify] and let me fill it in. - Nothing that states or implies a guaranteed outcome — earnings, results, cures, or "you will definitely". - No medical, legal or financial instruction presented as advice. Information, framed as information. - Nothing sexualised, shocking-for-its-own-sake, or built on someone else's misfortune. - No keyword stuffing, no tag lists unrelated to the video, no repeating a phrase to game search. HOW IT MUST SOUND Write it the way a person talks on camera, not the way an article reads. - Vary sentence length hard. Follow a 20-word sentence with a three-word one. Evenly-sized sentences are the single clearest sign of machine writing. - Use contractions. Say "you'll", not "you will". - Address one person as "you". Never "viewers", never "we" when you mean them. - Cut every throat-clearing phrase. Start on the point. - Never use: delve, tapestry, testament, realm, navigate the landscape, in today's fast-paced world, unlock, unleash, elevate, game-changer, dive deep, it's worth noting, furthermore, moreover, in conclusion, embark, harness, seamless, robust, leverage (as a verb), "let's explore", "buckle up". - No sentence may begin with "In this video" or "Welcome back to the channel". - Do not hedge. "This works" beats "this can potentially help". - No emoji unless I ask for them. GIVE ME THE ANGLE — one sentence. THE STOPS — each with the moment and the substance I add. THE ARGUMENT — what it all builds to. CLIP NOTES — where clips go and how long. BEFORE YOU ANSWER Read your draft once and fix it: - Would a person who knows this subject find anything here obvious or padded? Cut it. - Is every specific claim something the video can actually deliver? - Did any banned phrase survive? Replace it. - Are the sentences varied in length, or do they all run the same? Fix the rhythm. Then give me the final version only. No preamble, no explanation of what you did.
Tag
Prompt terkait
Commentary on something that just happened
A fast-turnaround script that adds analysis rather than repeating the news.
Tutorial script that people finish
A step-by-step tutorial built so the viewer sees the result before the work.
List video where nobody skips to the end
A ranked list script ordered so the viewer has to stay for the payoff.
Story video with a real turn
A personal story structured around a genuine change, not a sequence of events.
Explainer that survives a smart audience
Explains something complicated without the analogies that fall apart under scrutiny.
Review that reads as honest
A product review built on who it is wrong for, which is what makes the praise believable.