Thread by @robfordmancs

OK, slightly more scientific approach to this (though still N=2). Here's what I'll do - enter a topic in the search page, first on Youtube via incognito search, then on youtube via my regular browser.

Test 3 hypotheses:

1/?

https://twitter.com/robfordmancs/status/1038118236301213697

2/?

1. Does YouTube direct me towards radical content?
2. Once it gets to radical content, does it stay there?
3. Does this happen more quickly on regular browser than anon browser?

First test "geography" - on anon browser I get 15 legit geog education videos then a whole bunch of cooking videos.

Regular browser: geog, then a couple of "AI goes wrong", then lots of black holes (my daughter's interested in them.

Radicalising? Seems not. 3/?

Lets try something still broad, but a bit closer to contentious current affairs: "politics":

Anon browser: 8 or so CNN videos mainly on Kavanaugh hearings, then "how Trump won", then (uh-oh) Ben Shapiro...then a whole bunch of videos from a Tamil news website.

Regular browser: Several legit politics educational videos, then some philosophy ones, then abt 8 in its Dawkins-Ricky Gervais-Russell Brand-Jordan Peterson-finishing at a seemingly endless cheap video series called "SJWS owned".

Radicalisng? Not on anon, yes on normal search

Does it stick at radical content once it gets there? Oh hell yes - it offered every single "SJWS owned" video from #1 to #20 unbroken (god knows how many there are, I gave up). Different in anon and not anon mode? Yup. In anon mode you get current affairs in Tamil.

Lets' turn the heat up a bit more: "immigration".
Anon mode: Series of mainstream news vids mainly on McCain funderal and Trump rallies, then some fox bits, then weirdly a whole bunch of rap videos?
Not anon: same first video, but then its all celebrity interviews on talk shows?

So that's a surprise. Seems immigration makes YouTube think of either rappers or celebrities depending on whether its anon or not. Radicalising? No.

OK, how about: nationalism.

Anon: Very quickly arrives at an endless series of "countryballs" videos. I believe that's some kind of meme.

Not anon: starts at the same place, then quickly converges on celebrity interviews and clips from "The Office" Radicalising? No.

So what about a more directly current and polarising topic? Lets' try "Tommy Robinson trial".
Anon: OK, straight to the hard stuff here...but only for abt 6 videos. Then its over to talk shows, ending in a long series of Ed Sheeran live performances (possibly radicalizing?

Not anon: same set of radical media to start with, but then YouTube sends me off towards stand up comedians DESTROYING hecklers. So again, not radicalising, despite a pretty contentious starting point

I think the key here is that I'm clicking through mindlessly and without delay, just to see what the default is. Then it doesn't work. So the mechanism for serving up radicalising content must I think be primed somehow, probably by people watching longer on the first couple of

really radical content videos. Which suggests to me that one interesting Q is what exactly in those videos is it that leads people to reliably watch them longer, kicking this process in?

I did get one occurence in a relatively small sample where youtube transported me to the right wing echo chamber then stayed there. So I did replicate the mechanic at least once. But my tiny, unrepresentative experiment does suggests it is perhaps not the algorithm alone

Anyway, that concludes my Anecdotal Social Media experiment. My Friday nights are so exciting!