According to Kelli Fowlds, note card confessions are "confessional YouTube videos in which producers use note cards in order to disclose personal information about themselves to the public. These videos vary in topic, but often contain many similarities that constitute them as their own genre. The standard note card confession video contains a single person in front of a camera, generally with a medium to close-up camera framing. The person on screen plays a song and then proceeds to confess something personal about her or his life by flipping through a stack of note cards. Topics include bullying, problems with family members, and even suicidal thoughts or actions. Each note card displays writing that tells a piece of the story. These videos normally last between two and ten minutes, and the person in the video remains silent the entire time." Note card confessions rose to prominence in 2011 and 2012, with the respective deaths of Ben Breedlove by heart disease and Amanda Todd by suicide, shortly after publishing their confession videos. Note card confessions are also known as note card videos, note card stories, index card confessions, index card videos, index card stories, flash card confessions, flash card videos, and flash card stories.
Writer presents various stories of note card confessions, includes excerpts from clinical psychologists, and comments on the phenomenon.
Y
* Organization is generally reliable per WP:RSP, but article being in a section titled "blog" is suspect, and I cannot find credentials on the article author or editorial guidelines in general.
Y Yes, the article discusses the topic from start to finish.
N Source is a full paper written by a student (I think?) with the only oversight being professors of an academic institution. Article abstract gives doubts to thoroughness or reliability (a qualitative and exploratory study with a sample of 25 card story videos... visual analysis revealed... videos are bound to very specific frame[s] of presentation... they deal with specific topics... presenter does not remain (visually) anonymous). It appears to just be visual observations of relevant videos stated in an overly scientific way.
Entire paper is released under CC-BY 4.0, as an aside.
Y Source appears to have editorial oversight, though they allow blogs and user generated content, and they don't appear to identify which-is which. Very annoying. That said, word count would seem to suggest it is an actual article per [1]. It appears well written.
Y Wikipedia cannot seem to come to consensus on Vice's reliability per WP:RSP, but given the subject matter, the fact the article was written by a staff writer, there is not branding or wording that insinuates it is sponsored, and it doesn't read promotional, I think this is a genuine article with oversight and is probably reliable for the content it's describing.
* About section for website is drowning in puffery, I cannot find anything involving editorial policies aside from the puffery, no listings of editorial staff, nobody has ever discussed this source at RSP. Article appears to be written in an okay fashion, but focuses heavily on the opinion of the writer, and doesn't really discuss apology videos as a concept.
It's very difficult to find articles discussing apology videos as it's own phenomena; searches are over-saturated with news organizations reporting on specific apologies. I'm half-surprised I found the 2 sources I did.
Damn, even the Dalai Lama had to submit an apology video: [2]
