I'd rather have a panel of experts in the field with clear criteria decide the merit of the grant vs a crowdfunding-like model where people vote for the most charismatic person with the most well-produced video.
What clear criteria do they use to decide the merits of grants?
> the most charismatic person with the most well-produced video.
Ability to actually communicate your idea and justification for being funded, effectively and in a professional manner, is something notably missing from many academic projects. It's not exactly zero signal.