Aletho News


YouTube CEO: Users don’t like “authoritative” mainstream media channels but we boost them anyway

Susan Wojcicki confirms your suspicions

By Tom Parker | Reclaim The Net | May 10, 2020

Over the last few years, YouTube and its executives have made it clear that when it comes to news and current events, “authoritative sources” (mainstream media outlets it deems to be trustworthy) will get boosted via the platform’s recommendation tools while independent creators who cover the news will be suppressed.

And during an interview on The New York Times’ “Rabbit Hole” podcast, YouTube CEO Susan Wojcicki admitted that most YouTube users don’t want to watch these “authoritative” sources but said the platform will continue to boost them anyway.

Wojcicki said that she decided to start prioritizing authoritative sources in the wake of the terrorist attack in Nice, France on Bastille Day (July 14) in 2016.

“I remember reading about it and being just extremely upset and thinking our users need to know about it,” Wojcicki said.

She then decided that YouTube would start pushing videos about the attack to the homepage of users in France and prioritize videos from authoritative sources when French users searched for information about the attack.

However, after making the change, YouTube engineers warned Wojcicki videos from the mainstream “authoritative” sources weren’t performing very well in terms of engagement.

“The users don’t wanna actually see it,” the engineers told Wojcicki at the time.

But Wojcicki decided to keep showing the videos to users and told the engineers. “It doesn’t matter. We have a responsibility. Something happened in the world and it’s important for our users to know,” Wojcicki boasted.

She added that this was the first time YouTube started pushing information to users that was “relevant,” even if the users didn’t want to see it, compared to other content.

YouTube’s heavy promotion of authoritative sources makes it almost impossible to find coverage of news and current events from independent creatorsYouTube’s heavy promotion of authoritative sources makes it almost impossible to find coverage of news and current events from independent creators

In the years since Wojcicki made this decision, YouTube has rigged the site heavily in favor of authoritative sources to the point that they’re now 10x more likely to top search results for some news events while YouTubers won’t even get recommended for breaking news.

And despite most YouTube users relatively not wanting to watch these mainstream media sources, YouTube’s constant promotion of them in search, recommendations, and on the homepage has boosted their views by 75% since the start of 2020, cementing and strengthening the dominance of legacy sources in the online era.

Another stat that reveals how aggressively YouTube is pushing these unpopular authoritative sources is that the coronavirus news shelf, which forces videos from mainstream media outlets onto users via the homepage, has been viewed over 10 billion times.

Recent comments from YouTube’s Chief Product Officer, Neal Mohan, suggest that the platform’s approach to who gets to cover the news and its attitude towards independent creators won’t be changing any time soon.

During an interview last month, he said creators “espousing” opinions “in their basement” can’t provide context on the news.

May 10, 2020 - Posted by | Full Spectrum Dominance, Mainstream Media, Warmongering |

1 Comment »

  1. 4171

    How Is It Possible the Source Country of the Virus (Minus Wuhan) Was on Lockdown for Only 16 Days?

    Q!!Hs1Jq13jV69 May 2020 – 3:53:07 AM

    Origin Country of COVID-19: China
    Origin City of COVID-19: Wuhan
    How long was Wuhan on lockdown: 76 days
    How long was the remainder of China on lockdown:
    CNY extend Jan 24 – Feb 9 (avg): 16 days📁
    How long has the US been on lockdown?
    No spread of COVID-19 outside of Wuhan?
    How is it possible the source Country of the virus (minus Wuhan) was on lockdown for only 16 days?
    How long has the US been on lockdown?
    Forecasted lockdown CA, NY, OR, MI, ……?
    Logical thinking.
    Last week:

    1. New documents suggest the FBI laid a trap for Flynn. In February, Attorney General William Barr appointed U.S. Attorney Jeffrey Jensen to review the prosecution against Flynn after reports of irregularities. Last week, Jensen delivered a trove of documents to Flynn’s defense team — including handwritten notes showing FBI agents discussed whether they would “get him to lie, so we can prosecute him or get him fired.” In addition, emails showed the FBI had not properly warned Flynn that lying to the FBI was a crime when they met with him in the White House — a meeting then-Director James Comey planned to catch Flynn off guard.

    2. Text messages showed the FBI leadership kept the case open: Jensen’s trove included a memorandum showing that the FBI wanted to close the case against Flynn on Jan. 4, 2017, but that agent Peter Strzok — who hated Trump and had led the troubled investigations into both Hillary Clinton and the Trump campaign — ordered that the case be kept open. When asked why, Strzok referred to the “7th floor,” i.e. the FBI leadership.

    3. Flynn’s former law firm handed over documents suggesting secret pressure from the DOJ. Covington and Burling LLP, the legal team that handled his guilty plea in 2017, “discovered” that they had not handed all their documents to his new lawyer, Sidney Powell. Powell then told the court that the new documents showed the DOJ had threatened to indict his son unless Flynn pleaded guilty — a “side deal” that the DOJ kept hidden.

    This week:

    4. President Barack Obama set the Flynn investigation in motion: The House Intelligence Committee released 53 transcripts of interviews it conducted in the early days of the “Russia collusion” investigation. Former Deputy Attorney General Sally Yates told the committee it was Obama himself who told her about Flynn’s phone calls with the Russian ambassador. That information led the DOJ to investigate him under the obscure Logan Act of 1799, which bars private citizens from diplomacy and is almost never enforced.

    What comes next:

    5. Flynn could go free for now, but could be prosecuted for perjury if Joe Biden wins the election. Sol Wisenberg, who helped investigate President Bill Clinton, pointed out on Fox News that Flynn could still be prosecuted for perjury, since he told the court he was guilty before deciding to withdraw his plea. Wisenberg said that a Biden administration could pursue those charges — unless President Trump pardoned Flynn.

    6. What did Obama know? What did Biden know? The crucial event behind the investigation of Flynn and the public smearing of President-elect Trump through the “Steele dossier” now appears to be the Oval Office meeting where Obama told Yates about Flynn’s phone calls, and Comey was assigned to inform Trump about the dossier. Biden was among those present, and the Trump campaign has started to demand answers. Obama’s role now appears much more direct, and may not have been “by the book,” as former NSA Susan Rice claimed.

    7. Possible indictment of former Obama officials. U.S. Attorney John Durham is still pursuing a criminal investigation into the origins of the Obama administration’s inquiry into the Trump campaign. Many believe indictments are imminent. Powell told Breitbart News Sunday last weekend that Comey and other officials may have committed obstruction of justice and similar crimes, though she did not echo Trump’s claims of treason.


    Comment by Leland Roth | May 11, 2020 | Reply

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.