A Theory11 playing card review’s comment area and a media theory trading card review’s comment section appear to originate from separate parts of the internet. One is full of magicians debating the quality of the stock and if the tuck box gilding is better than it was in the previous year. In the other, A-level media students argue over whether the back-of-card description is too simplistic or if the Stuart Hall card provides a sufficient explanation of encoding and decoding. Every now and then, a member of the incorrect audience stumbles into the other video, becomes perplexed, and leaves a comment that neither community knows how to answer.
Since 2007, Theory11, a luxury playing card manufacturer, has been creating upscale decks for collectors and magicians. Unboxing videos that dwell over embossed tuck boxes, close-ups of gold foil inner flaps, and debates about whether the casino-grade paper material handles better than the previous release are just a few examples of how frequently their items appear in YouTube reviews that indicate a devoted fan following.
Within days of their publication, recent decks such as the Notorious B.I.G. commemorative deck, a Star Wars-themed Year of the Dark Side set, and a collaboration with photographer Peter McKinnon called Piracy produce their own wave of review articles. In the same manner that a wine critic discusses structure and finish, reviewers handle the cards with obvious care, discussing the unique face card designs and the finish’s longevity. The comment sections show how seriously this niche takes itself.
Separately, a subset of educational theory trading cards has gained popularity on YouTube, mostly due to students studying for media studies, communication theory, and sociology essays and tests. Among others, David Gauntlett has created decks with the express purpose of making complex theory more accessible and useful. Each card includes a theorist such as Foucault or Baudrillard, a summary of their main points, and instructions on how to use those points in an analytical essay.
These have been adopted by study channels on YouTube as review and tutorial content, guiding viewers through particular cards, outlining practical applications of Hall’s encoding and decoding model, and debating which theorists work well together in an article about media representation. Students discuss which cards they found most helpful in the comment areas, and there are occasionally debates on the accuracy of the summaries.
The review structure itself is doing a great job, which makes the YouTube scene for both categories intriguing. Since the audience cannot feel the stock through a screen, the video review serves as a stand-in for holding the deck for Theory11 cards. Reviewers explain tactile qualities through close-up film. When it comes to theory cards, the video review functions as a public study session, transforming what would normally be private note-taking into a shared resource. Both applications of the format are effective. They simply serve audiences who would have very little to say to one another and for quite different purposes.
Scrolling through both groups gives the impression that neither is very conscious of the other’s existence under the same search term. Media studies students aren’t looking for a limited-edition Notorious B.I.G. playing deck, and Theory11 collectors aren’t searching for Foucault study guides. There is only linguistic overlap. However, it occasionally causes collisions in comment sections when an algorithm shows the wrong video to someone. For example, a student searching for help with theory cards may end up watching an eight-minute review of foil embossing, or a magician may click on a video expecting a card fan and discover someone explaining the male gaze.
The unexpected has always happened in the YouTube comment area. It turns out that theory trading cards have just discovered a new way to create the particular kind of uncertainty that occurs when two very different audiences share a label and unexpectedly come across one another.
