Jubilee Media: Authentic Discussions or Political Rage Bait?

An episode of “Surrounded,” featuring politician Pete Buttigieg and 25 undecided voters during the 2024 election cycle.

“Provoke understanding & create human connection” – this is how the Jubilee Media channel describes its mission. Whether it’s scrolling through TikTok or seeing a recommendation on the YouTube homepage, members of Gen Z have likely stumbled across a video from Jubilee at one point or another. 

Some may know the channel for its lighthearted “Versus 1” series, where one person speed dates twenty potential matches. Those in the online political space may be more familiar with its “Middle Ground” series, where two small groups of people on opposite sides of a controversial issue discuss a variety of questions focused on the topic they disagree about. However, in the past year, the channel has gained a lot of traction for its “Surrounded” series, where a prominent political figure is met with a group of people who oppose their viewpoint. The chosen debaters range in popularity and perspective, from conservative commentators like Ben Shapiro and Candace Owens to liberal politicians like Pete Buttigieg. 

The format of “Surrounded” videos is unique among other debate-style videos. The group of people sits in a circle, with the debater seated at a small table in the center, accompanied by a timer. With each question prompt, the debaters must run up to the empty seat to debate. If the group begins to disagree with the selected speaker, they can hold up a red flag to indicate that they would like a new speaker to be chosen. If the majority of the group holds up their red flag, the speaker is “voted off” and the group can run up to the empty seat once again. Once the time is up, the question prompt changes, and a new discussion begins. 

This fast-paced format has received criticism from some viewers, ranging from the red flag voting system to the competitive aspect of having to be the first to reach the debate seat. Particularly, however, a recent debate titled “1 Progressive vs 20 Far-Right Conservatives” featuring broadcaster Medhi Hasan received a lot of online criticism, with many expressing their dismay with Jubilee’s inclusion of several participants. 

One instance that received much attention included a moment in the debate regarding the constitutional consistency of President Trump’s policies. Hasan accused one of the participants of being a fascist, to which the participant responded with “Yes, I am, absolutely,” as well as referencing theories popularized by Nazi theorist, Carl Schmitt. Another moment occurred during the debate on immigration: Hasan, an English-born US citizen, was told by the debater to “get the hell out” of the United States. 

These particular instances garnered a lot of attention online and began the broader discussion of the effectiveness of the Jubilee series. Many channel viewers and commentators alike have accused the channel of “rage baiting” their viewers, or featuring participants with extremist perspectives, with the sole purpose of invoking outrage among the audience to increase engagement. In a post-debate interview with the Guardian, Hasan raised this question. 

“I stand by what I said. I think I did a fair enough job as a debater,” Hasan said. “The bigger meta question is whether the format itself is a problem. Is there value in doing these debates?”

Online critics have shared their viewpoints regarding Hasan’s question. In an article from The New Yorker, the video series was described as “dizzying and bewildering to watch” and “as grueling as they are compelling.” Another article from Forbes labeled the debate by saying, “This might be the most insane Jubilee video yet.”

The combative nature of the debates, paired with the controversial subject matters being covered, has led many of the “Surrounded” videos to gain immense internet popularity. Most notably, in September 2024, the channel featured Charlie Kirk in its inaugural Surrounded episode, titled

“1 Conservative vs. 25 Liberal College Students.” This video has since amassed over 37 million views on YouTube, becoming the channel's most popular video to date. The heated arguments between the debaters, along with the personal nature of the topics, have led many critics to question the intentions and integrity of Jubilee. 

A recent episode titled “1 Journalist vs. 20 Conspiracy Theorists,” which featured journalist Andrew Callaghan, received many comments praising the non-confrontational nature of the debate. However, Callaghan posted a video on his YouTube channel detailing his experience, explaining how the Jubilee producers encouraged disagreement between him and the debaters.

“[The producers] thought I was some sort of misinformation watchdog,” Callaghan explained. “They pulled me aside and said, ‘You need to push back…Can you just offer some counterpoints?’”

Media reporter, Julia Alexander shared previous sentiments about the channel releasing content with ill intentions. “Jubilee Media’s done it again: taking 20 people with extremist views and putting them into a 90-minute video knowing that they’ll say extreme things and get an extreme amount of attention.”

If one thing is for certain, it’s that Jubilee is indeed getting an extreme amount of attention. The channel is gaining millions of views each day, both through its official YouTube channel and TikTok account, and also from the countless other users who repost clips of the debates to their own accounts. As for whether the channel is increasing the political polarization of Gen Z, that decision is ultimately left up to the viewer.