+2
Video is a completely different medium, so there's no reason to expect the same rules or trade offs to apply. I feel like most of the answers here are obvious, but just off the top of my head:
1) Video editing can enhance the product in more obvious and overt ways than audio editing (which, when done well, is invisible) can. With audio, all you can do is play other audio. With video, you can show relevant clips, and even talk over them. The editing, then, has more upside.
2) Video is more obviously performative, in that it usually involves someone looking into the camera, so the "just listening in on a conversation" feeling is usually already out the window, which means there's less inherent tolerance for a lack of production/editing.
3) People are more self-conscious about pauses, stumbling, stammering, or digressions while on video.
4) The barriers to entry on videos are higher, because they involve more complicated and potentially expensive tools to edit properly, whereas anyone can fire up Audacity, so videos are already probably self-selecting, upfront, for slightly more engaged or competent creators in aggregate.
5) I'm pretty sure people do post lots of crappy unedited videos, anyway. But a lot of video watching on the Internet is algorithmic, so I'd imagine you're a lot less likely to stumble upon it just browsing YouTube, for example, because it's a lot less likely to recommend it to you.