I tend to avoid videos. A person who can't take the time to write what they mean in simple declarative sentences is also more likely to have taken shortcuts on getting their facts right. In my experience the act of writing helps a person organize their thoughts.
Videos are also, IMO, inefficient. Using a dial-up connection it may take hours to download a video. Even the watching is wasteful when a ten minute video has material that could have been better explained in three paragraphs that would take less than a minute to read.
Asking for advice on the internet is much like standing in busy mall and asking advice. You get good, bad, and often completely irrelevant advice.
My pet peeve is neither good or bad information, but rather anti-information. This is usually phrased in passive-aggressive terms, often as skepticism or 'just asking questions'. The main trait of anti-information is that it does not criticize a narrative or set of fact and offer instead an alternative version. Instead it criticizes, often nit-picking facts that they do not understand, but offering nothing as an alternative. I call this anti-information because the longer you expose yourself to it the less you know. Often the practitioners, while claiming to advance knowledge through skepticism, advance ignorance to the point of nihilism.
Of course at some point it becomes clear that there are not enough hours in the day to correct everyone who is wrong on the internet:
http://xkcd.com/386/