TLDR if you don't wanna watch the whole thing: Benaminute (the Youtuber here) creates a fresh YouTube account and watches all recommended shorts without skipping. They repeat this 5 times, where they change their location to a random city in the US.
Below is the number of shorts after which alt-right content was recommended. Left wing/liberal content was never recommended first.
- Houston: 88 shorts
- Chicago: 98 shorts
- Atlanta: 109 shorts
- NYC: 247 shorts
- San Fransisco: never (Benaminute stopped after 250 shorts)
There however, was a certain pattern to this. First, non-political shorts were recommended. After that, AI Jesus shorts started to be recommended (with either AI Jesus talking to you, or an AI narrator narrating verses from the Bible). After this, non-political shorts by alt-right personalities (Jordan Peterson, Joe Rogan, Ben Shapiro, etc.) started to be recommended. Finally, explicitly alt-right shorts started to be recommended.
What I personally found both disturbing and kinda hilarious was in the case of Chicago. The non-political content in the beginning was a lot of Gen Alpha brainrot. Benaminute said that this seemed to be the norm for Chicago, as they had observed this in another similar experiment (which dealt with long-form content instead of shorts). After some shorts, there came a short where AI Gru (the main character from Despicable Me) was telling you to vote for Trump. He was going on about how voting for "Kamilia" would lose you "10000 rizz", and how voting for Trump would get you "1 million rizz".
In the end, Benaminute along with Miniminuteman propose a hypothesis trying to explain this phenomenon. They propose that alt-right content might be inciting more emotion, thus ranking high up in the algorithm. They say the algorithm isn't necessarily left wing or right wing, but that alt-right wingers have understood the methodology of how to capture and grow their audience better.
This entire comment and @[email protected]'s comments are so powerful.
I think people have two modes of getting information: digging into a newspaper article and trying to figure out what's going on and seeing a lurid headline in the tabloid rack. Most people do both ends of the spectrum and a lot of in-between. Modern technology lends itself to giving tabloid-like content while we're waiting in line for a minute. This is why Tiktok is concerned about being removed from the app store, even though it's easy to install the app yourself, easier than signing up for a newspaper delivery subscription was. But Tiktok isn't more like a lurid tabloid that most people would not go two steps out of their way to find, but they might read it waiting in a slow line. I'm hopeful that people will learn to manage the new technology and not keep being influenced by tabloid entertainment.
My GF is a student at the university of TikTok whereas I am very much about traditional media. It's interesting seeing where both succeed and both fail.
That said, you hit the nail on the head. A video on TikTok about some conspiracy bullshit is no different than seeing Bat Boy on the Weekly World News. The problem to me is not just the increased accessibility of this bullshit but the echo chamber around them that keep you engaged.
Trust but verify should be in everyone lexicon.