@LoadPast

August 20, 2025 at 5:37 am

Can someone explain to me why the democrats should take most of the blame for the election results? Im honestly asking, 'cause I felt like the "they're both equally bad" mentality was more to blame.
@justinprovon9652

August 20, 2025 at 5:37 am

True shit
@AnaxofRhodes

August 20, 2025 at 5:37 am

Clickbait is cancer. Great video.
@iplaysdrums

August 20, 2025 at 5:37 am

i have very mixed feelings on this issue, because on the one hand, you're absolutely right that once the government starts actively policing the media we're way too close to 1984, but on the other hand, this kind of feels like the libertarian view that the free market will naturally regulate itself toward safety and justice, which time and time again has been proven to be patently untrue. if the market is unregulated, the rich will get richer by whatever means possible, and if we, the consumers of media, aren't more discerning, there will quickly be no media that we can really trust (not that we're terribly far off from that now). it's really tough to walk the line between idealism and practical public policy in a way that serves everyone equally (it honestly might not be possible in all cases), but ultimately, i do think the consumer has to take the bulk of the responsibility in this case. in short, this is a rambling comment that starts out looking critical and ends up agreeing with you.
@wcemichael

August 20, 2025 at 5:37 am

The "fake news" is the main stream media slapping labels on the people wanting to report the truth, then try to shut them down. They are trying to do this with infowars dot com It's become like the Matrix, where you finally see the truth and propaganda "agents" will do anything to keep the lies going. The truth is the left does not want Trump to take office and will literally try to do anything they can. As long as we still have people still plugged into the "news matrix" they will only see what the agents want them to see.
@HamHamHampster

August 20, 2025 at 5:37 am

Mainstream media is just as much about sensationalism as "fake news" outlets.

Take "Russia hack our election". Non of the intelligence agency has enough evidence to show who, what, or how, and you have the mainstream media blowing it up like indisputable fact. Wikileak, the fact based news with a credibility track record, claiming that the source is within DNC. They get ignored/bashed to the ground.

So I agree, people are the problem.
@laflame4469

August 20, 2025 at 5:37 am

Dumbass conservatives in 2016 be like:
CNN – fake news
Huffington Post – fake news
Washington Post – fake news
New York Times – fake news
@sayachan6069

August 20, 2025 at 5:37 am

The question is through there is a huge market in conspiracy theory websites, ready made junk news and more which is easily exposed to casual viewers and has lead to really outlandish bullshit being passed as the truth so long as you have enough likes or shares and it needs countered somehow.

That easy to find garbage lead to a close family member getting sucked into the far right which really hit me pretty hard IRL because we grew up together.

And I'm not saying the mainstream media is perfect, it's bad too but people thinking everything on the internet is the golden bastion of truth is foolish.

A long time ago I got sucked into infowars and other sites and it poisoned my reason and judgement for four years. Honestly I was just lucky I unplugged from it all but not everyone is, some dig their heels in pretty deep including friends I kept pushing it onto, who sadly are still deep into that crud today, more so perhaps.
@bane666au

August 20, 2025 at 5:37 am

Yeah I agree
I'm sick of hearing bullshit like "elliot rodger was an MRA"
@DKayeS

August 20, 2025 at 5:37 am

I don't agree that fake news is responsible for the outcome of the election (insert mini-rant about oversimplification of complex issues and the need for an easy villain), but I am hopeful that the focus on it is making people a bit more skeptical of the click bait they believe and/or pass on. HAKO
@HouseFullaFrogs

August 20, 2025 at 5:37 am

I agree that education on source checking before accepting would help but demanding a new age of enlightenment is playing the waiting game. The government should not get full control over the media but they can pass laws about the environments created by sites like facebook. Fake news has always been a thing, sure, but it's become rampant enough because it's like printing money when you have advertisers in the mix, which facebook SHOULD care about since it does not want companies pulling ads from its walled garden ad system.
@HouseFullaFrogs

August 20, 2025 at 5:37 am

While I do think that part of the solution is to educate people to check sources before sharing or accepting, I do think Facebook can control an algorithm. I work for a DSP that buys adspace algorithmically and when it starts grabbing spots we don't want our customers' ads on, we get that data and we change the algorithm. That's not the customer or the website's fault, that's the company's fault. The algorithm is controllable. I wouldn't say the outcry is for facebook to develop a way to detect fake news. The issue is that their system actively promotes clickbait and sensationalism, and that is something that facebook does have control over but it garners less clicks.
@GarethWareth

August 20, 2025 at 5:37 am

fake news is often opposite news. some fake news is like "donald trump is secretly a bird" and blatantly bollocks and some is actually quite ironic and still has a message – opposite to that which is told by mainstream media.
@vcdaniels

August 20, 2025 at 5:37 am

04:46
First step to making facts top priority in our discourse is to stop with the false centrism.
Ask any reporter nowadays and you'll get the same excuses. "It's not my job to tell the truth". "Our audience is smart. They can research it themselves". Basically, telling the truth is looked down upon as "choosing a side". So the ppl seeking information must insert themselves into the role of perpetual college student where, in order to get any info on any event, you have to be willing to research and do the journalism yourself. Because otherwise you're just "accepting what's being told". And of course everyone has time to be journalists.

We have to be willing to abandon this "both sides" narrative. Both sides are not always the villain in every event. If someone is lying, the person who exposed the lie is not "just as bad" as the liar just because he isn't an angelic being. Calling the exposed liar a liar in a report is not "subjectively picking a side", it's you reporting a liar to the public. Thus informing them – which is the purpose of journalism.

Trying to assign equal blame to both sides of an argument does not solve the argument objectively. Nor does it keep one's mind unbiased. It simply binds you to a bias of wishing to appear aloof and "above the frey" – ever too leary to get dirty and find the facts of the matter. For once you do, you often find the cause of the problem and reporting that cause and holding it accountable might make you seem biased in support of that cause's detractors. And we can't have ourselves look bad now can we?
@bethjanelle20

August 20, 2025 at 5:37 am

HAKO!
@AbnormalWrench

August 20, 2025 at 5:37 am

42% of Americans think the earth is less than 6000 years old, and all life was poofed into existence all at once by God. But yah….why are people so bad at detecting fake news?
@andrewpowell1734

August 20, 2025 at 5:37 am

Fake news pre-existed the internet. Many of you young people out there may not remember cable access television. This is a channel that cable companies are required by law to provide. The channel is usually buried way up in the 100s. On this channel you could see everything from shows hosted by KKK members to GAYS FOR JESUS. The internet has only made it easier for people with such extreme views to reach a wide audience.
@ScootaReader

August 20, 2025 at 5:37 am

I was trying to determine what your shirt said the entire video because I forgot I'd seen it in a previous video. The closest I got was "DAS TITS." I am so glad you showed it at the end.
@emberflake

August 20, 2025 at 5:37 am

hako
@veronicabarron

August 20, 2025 at 5:37 am

Hey T1J! Nice work as usual. But I'm finding that this one doesn't sit right with me, so I want to toss a few things into the conversation:

I don't know about the Google search results algorithm, but as for Facebook trending topics, they use an algorithm to influence decisions about trending topics, but it is also curated by humans. (I only learned this bc there was an outcry by conservatives a few months ago when a Facebook employee admitted to featuring more stories that agreed with his own leftist worldview.) It seems to me that there is no meritocracy, not even for news articles, and not even in a world shaped by algorithms.

I agree that it sounds scary to think of the censorship potential re: major corporations deciding what is and isn't fake, and what is and isn't worthy of sharing. But, Google and Facebook already DO act as intermediaries between us and our content. They already have a lot of power that they are ALREADY wielding to influence what we do and do not see. So I think that we can't claim that there is a neutral position Facebook and Google should take, a "room temperature" to which they could "set" the algorithm. There is no neutral position.

And of course, there never has been. Here's the metaphor that comes to mind: let's say that a bookstore chooses to stock a book about denying the Holocaust. The author of this hypothetical book spends the whole book making the widely debunked claim that the Holocaust was a hoax. If the folks running the bookshop put this book in the history section, that's not a neutral choice. If they put it in "society" or "sociology" or "nonfiction" or "opinion", none of those is a neutral choice. If they feature it in a window display with streamers and balloons, that's not a neutral choice. And if they create a section for "widely debunked claims", and they shelve this Holocaust-denier book right next to "Global Warming is a Myth" and "The Earth is 5,000 Years Old", that's not a neutral choice.

The difference is that in this metaphor, Facebook and Google are like SUPER GIANT BOOKSHOPS and A LOT of people are using them, which gives them more influence. In a brick-and-mortar-only world, everyone in your town might be influenced by where the bookshop keeps its Holocaust-denier books, but oh my goodness 22% of the world's population uses Facebook (I just looked that number up. Wow.) and those 1.7 billion people are all influenced by how Facebook, the SUPER GIANT BOOKSHOP of the world, organizes their metaphorical bookshelves.

The way I see it, Facebook and Google provide a service that could be described as, "Here's this thing you might be interested in," which is a service that lots of people want. They could just as well be providing the service of, "Here's this thing you might be interested in. Also, our algorithm has flagged this story as 'likely not factual/a hoax'," which is also a service that lots of people want.

Anyway, I don't know what the answer is, but I lean toward the idea that it's fair to ask the big players to do something, not because it's really their job, but because of the whole "great power/great responsibility" thing.

Anyway, I didn't agree with everything you said in this one, but I appreciate you giving me something to think about, as usual. So thanks! What do you think? Would love to hear your thoughts.
@Bendilin

August 20, 2025 at 5:37 am

"We also have to be okay with being wrong. We have to accept facts once they're shown to us, even if they contradict our convictions. But before all that, we have to value facts and evidence in the first place over sensationalism and propaganda."

#GamerGate did not start as a harassment campaign against specific women, T1J.
@RaitheaFilms

August 20, 2025 at 5:37 am

Good video. I think you'd find this interview from Planet Money of a fake news creator interesting http://www.npr.org/sections/money/2016/12/02/504155809/episode-739-finding-the-fake-news-king
@JoshKantrowitz

August 20, 2025 at 5:37 am

Did anyone else think their video was messing up at around 0:30
@Baackus

August 20, 2025 at 5:37 am

This channel should be called Unbiased Ultimate, or something.
@MarcStollmeyer

August 20, 2025 at 5:37 am

If FaceBook added a dislike button, or way of showing that you disagree with the article without it contributing to the article's success, then people could prevent fake news from spreading.
@tessaquinlan7359

August 20, 2025 at 5:37 am

i dont think i comment on your videos enough but i am going to try to a lot harder know but i have been a fan for so long and i admire you so much, your content is so wonderful and i hope you keep doing it for a long time! thank you.
@Polyhat_

August 20, 2025 at 5:37 am

this video is clearly FAKE
@Polyhat_

August 20, 2025 at 5:37 am

Won't get notifications cos i get to many in the day already but trust me if youtube ever unsubbed me from you I would sub back asap <3
@StephenMeansMe

August 20, 2025 at 5:37 am

On the Internet, though, it's important to remember that there are no "people." There are just "accounts." Accounts don't need to have human beings controlling them. So one propagandist could set an entire botnet to spamming and liking and reposting the same bullshit story to get it top-trending, regardless of how many actual human eyes read the story and do the same. It'd be like if the religious establishment of the 18th c. could summon literal angels to repeat its messaging at a rate thousands of times higher than Paine, Hume, et al.
@iamsaztak

August 20, 2025 at 5:37 am

Thank you so much for saying this!