[Tom Nicholas] Veritasium: A Story of YouTube Propaganda

[Grifter]

Quick rundown:

• Purpose statement is the proliferation of sponsored videos being presented as reviews, particularly science-centric channels where the standard of research and balance is (and should) be higher.
• The focus is on a Waymo marketing push where they sponsored multiple channels for content (with footage of Waymo's conference call) and how those channels then repackaged and presented the talking points as their own w/o critical analysis.
• Veritasium is called out in particular because
  • 1) it's a science channel
  • 2) it had the deepest dive review where they actually filmed during Waymo rides
  • 3) has massive reach, often to an audience that is younger and/or trusts the content
  • 4) dem drama clicks

Additional info:

• Veritasium was giving a chance to view and refute the video in advance
• Veritasium is in the comments doubling down

Anyhow, perhaps you disagree w/this particular example, but this is concerning behavior that needs to be checked.

 

[Davidion]

Without having watched this video: his waymo video was incredibly glowing and suggests any sentiment that self-driving tech isn't ready for prime time is more or less made up. I didn't have enough technical knowledge to be able to judge.

This is interesting

 

[pj-]

Don't think I can sit through 51 minutes of baby Colin Furze..

I'll wait for the veritasium response video, brought to us by kiwico

 

[FliX]

It's a pretty damming video and really sours the taste for Veritasium as a whole. Their nit -picky response doesn't help by completely ignoring the bigger picture.
I legit don't understand why a credible channel would sully their reputation to get a few extra bucks from Google. I can only assume veritasium was making bank without this already.

 

[shan780]

I'm a big fan of Tom, so I'm glad to see him posted here. This video as well as the one he did on Johnny Harris really opened my eyes as to just how insidious corporate sponsorship of YouTube videos can be. Any YouTuber that does this sort of "full integration" has effectively ruined their reputation as far as I'm concerned - Veritasium is fairly popular, and often their videos are pretty well produced, so I wonder what amount of money would've had to have been offered here

 

[GameAddict411]

I get the prospective on how a lot of sponsored content is not actually well disclosed in a lot of youtube channels despite them being big. Digital Foundry is the only one that I know of that actually puts "Sponsored" in the title of the videos. So the criticism that Veritasium is getting for that video is valid. But this guy video title and thumbnail is also pretty inflammatory. It actually distracts from the valid points he brings up to the video. It also most likely to make the people discussed in these videos even more defensive instead of changing the way they are enabling these big companies.

 

[Deleted member 22750]

Everything is a rich mans trick

Brought to you by Walmart and subway

eat fresh

 

[lorddarkflare]

Yeah, I remember watching the Veritaserum video and rolling my eyes throughout. It was not bad enough to get me to not watch future content, but it reminded me to always keep a look out.

 

[Messofanego]

Ironic channel name, verily.

I get the prospective on how a lot of sponsored content is not actually well disclosed in a lot of youtube channels despite them being big. Digital Foundry is the only one that I know of that actually puts "Sponsored" in the title of the videos. So the criticism that Veritasium is getting for that video is valid. But this guy video title and thumbnail is also pretty inflammatory. It actually distracts from the valid points he brings up to the video. It also most likely to make the people discussed in these videos even more defensive instead of changing the way they are enabling these big companies.

Click to shrink...

He gives Veritasium the benefit of the doubt and tries to understand his motivations at a few points but all that lying by statistics and appealing to emotion by using deaths is just off-putting.

 

[oreomunsta]

Oh nice! This might be the first time that I've seen Tom's videos shared on Era. It's a great video

While I do hope to have automated driving that's safe and reliable in the future, the point at the end of the video that public transit is already a possible solution to the problems that we're trying to fix is pretty insightful (though it'd take a lot to shape cities into being truly public transport friendly)

 

[GameAddict411]

Ironic channel name, verily.

He gives Veritasium the benefit of the doubt and tries to understand his motivations at a few points but all that lying by statistics and appealing to emotion by using deaths is just off-putting.

Click to shrink...

I agree with you. I noticed the issue when the video first released. I actually work in the automotive industry and Derek's approach to the topic of self driving cars was free from critical analysis that I am used to from him and it was immediately off putting. I hope it's a lesson for him to stop doing content like that. As for the author of the video, it's an excellent video. I also watched the one about Harris. But like I said, the video title and thumbnail doesn't really help with starting a conversation with the creators in question. But I guess maybe he is trying to play the algorithm game on Youtube?

 

[GameAddict411]

Oh nice! This might be the first time that I've seen Tom's videos shared on Era. It's a great video

While I do hope to have automated driving that's safe and reliable in the future, the point at the end of the video that public transit is already a possible solution to the problems that we're trying to fix is pretty insightful (though it'd take a lot to shape cities into being truly public transport friendly)

Click to shrink...

Sadly, in many large cities in the United States public transit is very underfunded and lack proper infrastructure. The only big city I have been to in the United States where I genuinely felt like I don't need a car was Portland Oregon. The wait time for the next bus or train was minimal and I could go to a lot of places very quickly and cheaply. Where I live outside detroit it's pretty much impossible to go anywhere without a car or on foot.

 

[Messofanego]

I agree with you. I noticed the issue when the video first released. I actually work in the automotive industry and Derek's approach to the topic of self driving cars was free from critical analysis that I am used to from him and it was immediately off putting. I hope it's a lesson for him to stop doing content like that. As for the author of the video, it's an excellent video. I also watched the one about Harris. But like I said, the video title and thumbnail doesn't really help with starting a conversation with the creators in question. But I guess maybe he is trying to play the algorithm game on Youtube?

Click to shrink...

You have to make a sensationalist thumbnail on YouTube if you want to stay in business and get clicks these days, but it's not quite clickbait at least because Veritasium does engage in a lot of misinformation sadly. That Waymo video is just pure cringe, and not sure why he's not as up front as other Waymo ambassadors in his level of involvement.

 

[oreomunsta]

Sadly, in many large cities in the United States public transit is very underfunded and lack proper infrastructure. The only big city I have been to in the United States where I genuinely felt like I don't need a car was Portland Oregon. The wait time for the next bus or train was minimal and I could go to a lot of places very quickly and cheaply. Where I live outside detroit it's pretty much impossible to go anywhere without a car or on foot.

Click to shrink...

I hear ya! I also live in a city that was really designed more for cars than it was for public transit. Last I had to depend on transit, I would be on it for about an hour and a half and have to do a transfer, whereas in the car I can do the same trip in 30 minutes in decent weather

I would consider my city as one that invests quite a bit into its public transit, too

 

[Lafazar]

I am still a big fan of Veritasium and even use a handful of their videos in my physics course. But their videos started to drift more and more in this direction, with the driverless car video being a sad culmination and eroding my trust in their integrity. This is not the critical analysis I am used to from this channel.

I used to recommend the whole channel to my pupils, which I don't do anymore. I'm glad someone finally called them out in such a thorough fashion. Veritasium still create educational content of great quality, but the sponsored videos are a blemish on the channel.

 

[samoyed]

You have to make a sensationalist thumbnail on YouTube if you want to stay in business and get clicks these days

Click to shrink...

It is ironic that the video expose on Veritasium is still subject to the same forces that, presumably, pushed Veritasium in this direction. Integrity is eroded by minute, reasonable, financial compromises until one day you look back and think 'wait this is actually bad'.

 

[Paganmoon]

I am still a big fan of Veritasium and even use a handful of their videos in my physics course. But their videos started to drift more and more in this direction, with the driverless car video being a sad culmination and eroding my trust in their integrity. This is not the critical analysis I am used to from this channel.

Click to shrink...

I think it culminated several years ago, and stayed at that level, with every few videos being an informercial. For instance his dandruff video which was basically a 9 minute piece payed by Head and Shoulders, that was years ago.

He still has some good "teaching" videos though.

 

[Maccix]

I got it recommended when it came out. Didn't know Tom and thought he was some alt righter or anti science guy at first.

It got me thinking. Many people on here say, they follow science. But for most of us non scientists it is more that we follow people who communicate science. From documentaries, to news outlets, journals, books and yes, YouTubers. Big corporations probably know that science communicators have often build up trust to the people following them and are looking for ways to exploit that trust. This can lead to an erosion of trust in science as a whole and become dangerous.

Science YouTubers cooperating with bill gates and promoting his book about climate change is absolutely making some people questioning climate change on a fundamental level.

 

[Lafazar]

I think it culminated several years ago, and stayed at that level, with every few videos being an informercial. For instance his dandruff video which was basically a 9 minute piece payed by Head and Shoulders, that was years ago.

He still has some good "teaching" videos though.

Click to shrink...

Oh dear, you're right. I completely forgot about that. I didn't even watch that one because it was so obviously an ad.

 

[Messofanego]

I got it recommended when it came out. Didn't know Tom and thought he was some alt righter or anti science guy at first.

It got me thinking. Many people on here say, they follow science. But for most of us non scientists it is more that we follow people who communicate science. From documentaries, to news outlets, journals, books and yes, YouTubers. Big corporations probably know that science communicators have often build up trust to the people following them and are looking for ways to exploit that trust. This can lead to an erosion of trust in science as a whole and become dangerous.

Science YouTubers cooperating with bill gates and promoting his book about climate change is absolutely making some people questioning climate change on a fundamental level.

Click to shrink...

Yeah I would say there are few actual scientists who are also influencers or "content creators" because that's not their full time job and it requires that amount of commitment, so it's left often to science communicators who are very prone to influence and hyperbole. Communicating concepts and theories in science is very much necessary for the general public to get on board, especially with initiatives for climate change. NASA does a good job on their social media. I just don't trust science YouTubers, no matter how well meaning they are. Corporations being aware of that can seed mistrust in the experts through several misinformation campaigns such as the big one being mineral water companies successfully making people think tap water is less healthy. I'm glad at least fossil fuel propaganda isn't a big thing filtered through influencers. I don't think Waymo was trying to go for that here instead of just running defence for driverless tech after all the bad publicity. But it's something to be aware of.

 

[Calabi]

I was suspicious of that self driving car video at the time and didn't believe a word of it. I don't know I guess I just shrugged it off at the time it's obvious it was a paid advert.

 

[Thorrgal]

I get the prospective on how a lot of sponsored content is not actually well disclosed in a lot of youtube channels despite them being big. Digital Foundry is the only one that I know of that actually puts "Sponsored" in the title of the videos. So the criticism that Veritasium is getting for that video is valid. But this guy video title and thumbnail is also pretty inflammatory. It actually distracts from the valid points he brings up to the video. It also most likely to make the people discussed in these videos even more defensive instead of changing the way they are enabling these big companies.

Click to shrink...

I think you have yo disclose it in the EU. Now with Brexit I'm not sure about the UK.

 

[Maccix]

Yeah I would say there are few actual scientists who are also influencers or "content creators" because that's not their full time job and it requires that amount of commitment, so it's left often to science communicators who are very prone to influence and hyperbole. Communicating concepts and theories in science is very much necessary for the general public to get on board, especially with initiatives for climate change. NASA does a good job on their social media. I just don't trust science YouTubers, no matter how well meaning they are. Corporations being aware of that can seed mistrust in the experts through several misinformation campaigns such as the big one being mineral water companies successfully making people think tap water is less healthy. I'm glad at least fossil fuel propaganda isn't a big thing filtered through influencers. I don't think Waymo was trying to go for that here instead of just running defence for driverless tech after all the bad publicity. But it's something to be aware of.

Click to shrink...

I think on a whole, influencers are easy to influence when a companies marketing knows what its doing.

I don't think Veritasium took the money and said whatever the sponsor wanted to hear. I think they sold him all the positive facts to a point where he genuinely believes in what he said. Waymo was probably just advertising their business.

You can the same approach in tech, when everyone is hyped up to hell and back for a new flagship phone etc. Many of these YouTubers are really excited and not just hyping it up for Apple, Samsung and co, because of how marketing departments are approaching them. Corporations makes them excited so they make us excited.

 

[Sacrilicious]

Honestly, out of all the science channels on YouTube, I can't say I'm surprised it's Veritasium.

Although I liked his work initially, some of his videos bothered me because he seemed willing to sensationalize educational material for the sake of clickbait and entertainment (enough to undermine the educational value of some videos).

Playing fast and loose with facts for financial gain is concerning for any educator (and makes me question that title). This it looks like it was taken just a step further.

 

[NunezL]

I think this video was a way worse offender:





This video literally has zero content, it's pretty baffling.
They even had to do an apology in the comments:
"Judging from the comments and likes:dislikes, I missed the mark with this video.
I just want to make it clear that the failing was my own and not because of any brand talking points. They asked me what I wanted to talk about and I said 'how electric cars are the future.' They gave me total control over the script and video and didn't ask me to change a thing. Personally I didn't think this video was too branded because it's about electric cars in general. I drive an electric car and I like it a lot..."

 

[Messofanego]

Is SciShow and It's Okay To Be Smart compromised by corporate interests yet or have they been able to separate that for now?

 

[GameAddict411]

I think this video was a way worse offender:




They even had to do an apology in the comments:
"Judging from the comments and likes:dislikes, I missed the mark with this video.
I just want to make it clear that the failing was my own and not because of any brand talking points. They asked me what I wanted to talk about and I said 'how electric cars are the future.' They gave me total control over the script and video and didn't ask me to change a thing. Personally I didn't think this video was too branded because it's about electric cars in general. I drive an electric car and I like it a lot..."

Click to shrink...

Like others have noted, there is the head & shoulder shampoo video as well. It seems that Derek have fallen into corporate hands without even realizing it. Like any outside prospective would tell him that he should not be making content that is free from science.

 

[Dreams-Visions]

Aw man not Veratasium. I liked the few videos of his that I watched. Not as good as PBS Space Time, so whatever.

Now if PBS Space Time ever got called out, I'd die a little inside.

 

[Sidebuster]

I think this video was a way worse offender:





This video literally has zero content, it's pretty baffling.
They even had to do an apology in the comments:
"Judging from the comments and likes:dislikes, I missed the mark with this video.
I just want to make it clear that the failing was my own and not because of any brand talking points. They asked me what I wanted to talk about and I
said 'how electric cars are the future.' They gave me total control over the script and video and didn't ask me to change a thing. Personally I didn't think this video was too branded because it's about electric cars in general. I drive an electric car and I like it a lot..."

Click to shrink...

These kind of people never seem to understand that the reason these companies use them is because they're pre-made shills. The companies don't need to oversee control as these kinds of people are already happy to please and bias their video heavily. Don't wanna bite the hand that feeds after all. Why go find somebody who you'll have to butt heads with and risk looking bad when you can find somebody happy to spread bullshit just because they like the product or happy to just make money. It seems harmless after all.

 

[Kyougar]

Is SciShow and It's Okay To Be Smart compromised by corporate interests yet or have they been able to separate that for now?

Click to shrink...

I watch Scishow Space and they are mostly reporting on new findings. Or gushing about a new piece of technology that is build on earth or launched into space. But with those Neeeeeerds, I expect gushing/shilling every new tech that has the potential to advance Ssace exploration.

Also, there was this one time that someone wanted to diss Kurzgesagt but it was debunked and Kurzgesagt is still the best Science/Future/Ecology channel on Youtube

 

[qaopjlll]

Veritasium's educational videos are amazing to watch stoned. Sucks he's turned into a corporate shill but he still puts out good content every once in a while (though admittedly it's becoming less frequent).

 

[Corncob]

The video has some good points but it definitely feels overly critical and nitpicky too. Especially the part about 94% of crashes being human error. The fact the the 94% has cases where human error is just one factor in the midst of several doesn't change the overall point that properly designed driverless cars will be safer. A driverless car wouldn't need to read an obscured road sign and its collision detection has a far greater reaction time than humans ever could.

Veritasium should be clearer about sponsorship deals, but I feel like the video in question is more a case of him actually believing in the points he makes in the video and wanting to reduce some of the fear mongering about driverless cars, rather than any kind of corporate shilling.

 

[Sulik2]

Just don't watch Youtube/Facebook for information. Its really not that complicated. We know they are shit sources at this point, just stop it.

 

[smurfx]

Is SciShow and It's Okay To Be Smart compromised by corporate interests yet or have they been able to separate that for now?

Click to shrink...

i'm pretty sure its okay to be smart has been sponsored before.

 

[SRG01]

Is SciShow and It's Okay To Be Smart compromised by corporate interests yet or have they been able to separate that for now?

Click to shrink...

SciShow is probably the most transparent out of all the science-tubers out there.

 

[Daniagatha]

After watching Tom's video my husband imediatly remembered another one that do the same was Veritasium.

We like Adam Ragusea's videos about food and their science so imagine our....cringeness?? when he did a video about why we need suplements and how vitamins work.....using the sponsor :D.

It felt very....artificial and you feel confused if you should believe what he is telling because he is talking about a suplement brand that sponsered the video =/

 

[Messofanego]

The video has some good points but it definitely feels overly critical and nitpicky too. Especially the part about 94% of crashes being human error. The fact the the 94% has cases where human error is just one factor in the midst of several doesn't change the overall point that properly designed driverless cars will be safer. A driverless car wouldn't need to read an obscured road sign and its collision detection has a far greater reaction time than humans ever could.

Veritasium should be clearer about sponsorship deals, but I feel like the video in question is more a case of him actually believing in the points he makes in the video and wanting to reduce some of the fear mongering about driverless cars, rather than any kind of corporate shilling.

Click to shrink...

Veritasium's argument isn't that driverless cars are potentially safer, he's arguing that driverless cars can avoid all accidents and is not looking at this from a critical lens at all. There's no nuance here as Tom said. Then to not cite that 94% statistic which happens to be one of the advertising points from Waymo is just shilling. The timing after the backlash of driverless cars in the public eye, to release these promotional videos is suspect. Like there are more congruent ways to be for driverless cars and human safety than what this turned out to be.

 

[Grifter]

Disclosure: I was reminded to post after chuckling for days over a commenter's response to Veritasium's reply - "Veripassiveaggressium"

 

[A Grizzly Bear]

The video has some good points but it definitely feels overly critical and nitpicky too. Especially the part about 94% of crashes being human error. The fact the the 94% has cases where human error is just one factor in the midst of several doesn't change the overall point that properly designed driverless cars will be safer. A driverless car wouldn't need to read an obscured road sign and its collision detection has a far greater reaction time than humans ever could.

Veritasium should be clearer about sponsorship deals, but I feel like the video in question is more a case of him actually believing in the points he makes in the video and wanting to reduce some of the fear mongering about driverless cars, rather than any kind of corporate shilling.

Click to shrink...

The whole point of the video is to emphasize how corporate influence can lead to a product that is more about pushing an agenda than it is about informing people, having a meaningful discussion and giving them the tools to think critically. The statistics segment is just highlighting how they did that by misrepresenting the study. His point was, as stated at the end of the section, we should be having a discussion about what problems driverless cars will and won't solve.

If you look at each section of the video in isolation then I guess it could come off as nitpicky. However, Tom wraps the whole video up nicely in discussing how Big Tech loves to show us what might be, describes it as a certainty and in reality is just pushing what they want to happen. Telling people it's an inevitability because it's safer and better than them while they test them in the open, warts and all, just makes it a discussion of whether you're for or against it.

A driverless car wouldn't need to read an obscured road sign and its collision detection has a far greater reaction time than humans ever could.

Click to shrink...

Why wouldn't a driverless car need to know the sign is there? Are you saying it would just know to stop? Or that its collision detection is so good it wouldn't need to? This is part of the point that was being made about why we need to have discussions that approach all aspects of this technology.

 

[Muppet of a Man]

This guy is fantastic. This is why old school investigative journalism is so important to understanding the nuances of complex science, technologies, and systems. He is generally skeptical but does not steer into contrarian territory. He thoroughly vets all sources of information. He discloses sponsors up front and then isolates their involvement to a compartmentalized advertisement. He gets into nuance in the discussion of the technology at hand and is willing to detail the pros, cons, and any conditions/caveats important to said discussion. This sort of thing is more important than ever. The perverse incentive structure of internet-based content creation and the ever-accelerating 24 hour news cycle is completely at odds with it, however.

There needs to be a movement in news/journalism akin to the "slow food" movement in the culinary/foodie arena. As such, "slow information" tends to overwhelmingly be more accurate, more complete information. It is badly needed in this new world we live in.

 

[Corncob]

Why wouldn't a driverless car need to know the sign is there? Are you saying it would just know to stop? Or that its collision detection is so good it wouldn't need to? This is part of the point that was being made about why we need to have discussions that approach all aspects of this technology.

Click to shrink...

Earlier in the video it said that all street maps need to be programmed into the navigation system prior to the car self-driving so I'd assume the car would know the locations of all the static road signs like stop signs?

 

[NunezL]

This guy is fantastic. This is why old school investigative journalism is so important to understanding the nuances of complex science, technologies, and systems. He is generally skeptical but does not steer into contrarian territory. He thoroughly vets all sources of information. He discloses sponsors up front and then isolates their involvement to a compartmentalized advertisement. He gets into nuance in the discussion of the technology at hand and is willing to detail the pros, cons, and any conditions/caveats important to said discussion. This sort of thing is more important than ever. The perverse incentive structure of internet-based content creation and the ever-accelerating 24 hour news cycle is completely at odds with it, however.

There needs to be a movement in news/journalism akin to the "slow food" movement in the culinary/foodie arena. As such, "slow information" tends to overwhelmingly be more accurate, more complete information. It is badly needed in this new world we live in.

Click to shrink...

Tell me you didn't watch the video without telling me you didn't watch the video .mp3

 

[Muppet of a Man]

Tell me you didn't watch the video without telling me you didn't watch the video .mp3

Click to shrink...

What the hell are you talking about? I literally just got done watching the video on waymo and veritasium.

Sound like, ironically, you did not watch the video...

 

[Corncob]

What the hell are you talking about? I literally just got done watching the video on waymo and veritasium.

Sound like, ironically, you did not watch the video...

Click to shrink...

They must think you were talking about Veritasium rather than the guy making the video about Veritasium

 

[NunezL]

What the hell are you talking about? I literally just got done watching the video on waymo and veritasium.

Click to shrink...

Edit: Sorry I thought you were talking about Veritaserum.

They must think you were talking about Veritasium rather than the guy making the video about Veritasium

Click to shrink...

Yep!

 

[Muppet of a Man]

Edit:sorry I thought you were talking about Veritaserum

Click to shrink...

I see you finally understand that I've been talking about Tom Nicholas in my post. This is why, again, it is important to slow down and digest information before trying to respond or create new content. Everyone has been conditioned in this internet content creation era to jump on everything before even understanding what they are reading, seeing, etc. Not trying to pick on you or single you out, but this exact situation just reinforces the point I was trying to make more generally.

 

[NunezL]

I see you finally understand that I've been talking about Tom Nicholas in my post. This is why, again, it is important to slow down and digest information before trying to respond or create new content. Everyone has been conditioned in this internet content creation era to jump on everything before even understanding what they are reading, seeing, etc. Not trying to pick on you or single you out, but this exact situation just reinforces the point I was trying to make more generally.

Click to shrink...

You sure love hearing yourself talk

 

[Muppet of a Man]

You sure love hearing yourself talk

Click to shrink...

Haha. At this point I can't tell if you are being facetious or not, another shortcoming of text-based internet communication!

 

[Lord Error]

I haven't seen the Veritasium video on this, and now most likely won't see it, but if he really didn't put a giant sized asterisk next to that comment that "Waymo driver is the most experienced driver in the world" knowing full well how all that "experience" is right now pretty much worthless in any less than ideal weather conditions, I'd call that shilling for the sponsor, for sure.

 

[guise]

This was a very long winded way of saying Veritasium needs to be more transparent and chill the fuck out with the sycophancy when publishing sponsored content.