In responses to the answers given to this question, I asked a question. From the answer to my question, I think the problem is rooted in different interpretations of the original question. Since I cannot speak for the OP, I simplify the case based on a logical interpretation (since my previous question has an answer, I cannot entirely change it, and ask a new question here).
Despite the controversial opinions, almost anyone considered the OP's strategy unreasonable or illegitimate.
Which of the following points is unreasonable or illegitimate?
- The supervisor asks his/her PhD student to deliver a progress report every few months.
- The supervisor instructs the PhD student to read his/her report in front of webcam instead of writing it on paper.
- The supervisor shares the video reports of research projects undergoing in his/her group.
One may consider consent for the last step, but it is not the case, as the OP stated each PhD student initially agreed to the public release of the videos.
As I emphasised before I personally don't approve the OP's strategy, but don't understand what justifies such a strong attack to the OP.
- Some people stressed that PhD students might not have the required skills. Since the OP did not mention video making, I interpret the task as "explaining their achievements" in front of the camera only.
- Some said activities in the social networks is not the responsibility of the PhD students. Again, the OP said, "we have a youtube channel". Thus, I interpret, s/he edits and uploads the videos.