Countless AI slop channels are relentlessly copying our work. So one day we decided: enough is enough. We went undercover to investigate who’s behind them and what this flood of AI slop means for the future of educational content on YouTube.
Countless AI slop channels are relentlessly copying our work. So one day we decided: enough is enough. We went undercover to investigate who’s behind them and what this flood of AI slop means for the future of educational content on YouTube.
What’s so shitty about it? I quite like it.
They claim to be “almost entirely viewer-funded”, which was later proved to NOT be the case. Kurzgesagt deflected when asked about this.
They were making videos sponsored by Breakthrough Energy, Open Philantropy, and the Gates Foundation.
All three are Bill Gates affiliated.
Those videos were also conveniently aligning with financial interests of Bill Gates, as the videos advocated for carbon capture and lab meat. Bill Gates massively invested in both
Also vaping is bad Weed is bad Smoking is awesome
Like WTF? Phillip Morris give you some cash?
The smoking is awesome video is just a clickbait title, the video’s script is about all the ways smoking feels good but harms you. It’s not pro-smoking
Those are fair reasons for skepticism, but whenever I check, their videos are not misrepresenting or twisting the subjects they analyze, but are rather transparent about their sources, their limitations and the differences between presentation of data and more “opinion based” parts.
For sure it would be a problem if they were in the pocket of industry, but if somebody makes a truthful quality video on a topic, and they receive support from people interested in truthful quality videos on that topic, that itself does not render the video less truthful or less quality.
And doesn’t render it a shitty channel.
It’s blatant misinformation based on false data.
A video on the topic: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HjHMoNGqQTI
You can also read Kurzgesagt’s ‘response’, which cherry picks two arguments, twists them, doesn’t even properly respond to them, and ignores all other points made. In perfect, corporate PR fashion.
https://www.reddit.com/r/kurzgesagt/comments/10jlyyk/kurzgesagt_statement_to_the_conflict_of_interest/?solution=b43f6dc8abb6ffdbb43f6dc8abb6ffdb&js_challenge=1&jsc_token=7afd7253fec22262ff1c52b1703fe9ec99c0261658c638dce035a6bc03872661&jsc_orig_r=
Are there text format criticisms? Or could you highlight the key points or evidence against Kurzgesagt? Sorry, I have a hard time parsing videos on this kind of stuff.
Also in general the videos I’ve seen are solid information based on good data, like Our World On Data, is it some specific video or class of videos that are misinformation and poorly founded in data?