My friends and I have postulated this for a while and are curious of others’ opinions. This is obviously purely hypothetical. This information could be helpful for those with spectacular, yet controversial extracurriculars.
For those who are unfamiliar, ExplosmEntertainment has a Youtube Channel that makes “highly” offensive/crude videos; however, these videos are immensely popular and successful. Recently, Explosm raised over 3 million US dollars for its new product called “Joking Hazard” in a matter of a month.
Say you were the founder or one of the co-founders of ExplosmEntertainment (specifically, Cyanide and Happiness). Would you list this as one of your ECs? Why or why not?
Interesting dynamic. The admission officers might find it amusing; your peers at school may find it distasteful. If the nature of the publication adheres to sensitive issues such as racism, sexism, or homophobic content, I’d stay away. Also in light of recent political events, remember to keep your distance from political extremism, unless it is to the left.
Yes, I would list it. I just watched a couple of those, and they are crude, but clever. They also have millions of followers. The production values seem to be high. The founders should clearly list this for the reasons I just mentioned. Let’s say you are the hypothetical founder of something else in this vein. But your production values are as crude as the content. Maybe the humorous edge is lacking. And your shorts don’t each have 8 million views, but more like 800. In that case, no, don’t list it.
Also, I would absolutely bear in mind the adcoms who will be possibly viewing whatever links are provided. Maybe some colleges would find this type of thing exactly what they love to see, but not so much others. I don’t know enough about the vibe of a college like Vanderbilt, but I am guessing they are a tad more conservatice than U of Chicago, who I imagine would probably love those videos. I can also see some of the LACs like Oberlin or Skidmore liking this kind of thing.