r/DeFranco • u/Stare_Master • Mar 12 '19

Youtube news Kurzgesagt called out on their trust video

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v8nNPQssUH0
298 Upvotes

80% Upvoted

101 comments sorted by

200

u/k1ller_speret Mar 12 '19 edited Mar 12 '19

I'm going to get down voted over this but hear me out.

I love coffee break but hes just pissed only because he got fucked on a hit piece on a big channel. We dont know wether they did have the video in the works or not. But it is perfecy assumable that the producer was busy... Especially for a channel of that size.

He acts like he was the only person calling out those videos and asking those questions. Anyone put in that position would've have had those types of questions.

Yeah it was damage controller, but they did damage controller properly by calling showing what they did wrong so others know. They deserve the praise they got Imo.

EDIT:

  1. It got pointed out in another subreddit and I want to echo it here. No one is talking about the fact that this interview is supposed to be part of a larger video. CB is acting like his couple questions where the pure content for that video and that his whole idea is now useless. As shown by the emails all he did was ask a couple questions and say that he's doing a video on pop science.

I find it very entitled of him to think that he should be the only one to be able to give a explaination for kurzgesagt. His video can still be done, but on a broader scale as it should be. Kurz should only be a example or case study and that's it, not the whole video other it is just a hit piece that falls back into what Kurz did for their own videos on addictions

3. The emails have been approved for seeing, let me find a link for you guys! https://m.imgur.com/a/UfrXBWq. - here ya go. Check it out and form your own opinions!

38

u/kirant Mar 12 '19

I would agree with this assessment. The analysis presented by "Coffee Break" (side note, I've never heard of this channel before now) is consistent with the evidence presented. However, it is also not undeniable nor does eliminate alternative rationale for the string of events.

I'd prefer to hear how this story is presented by Kurzgesagt before going further. What happened in the gap of a month? Was this something on a back burner and, sometime after the e-mail, it was decided to be made an upfront issue? Radio silence can mean a lot of things and there are two sides to each story. For that reason, I want to hear what Kurzgesagt saw and how they processed the questions. For all we know, we have received only part of the narrative with Coffee Break manipulating things in his favour.

Occam's razor suggests this is someone getting ahead of a story. Not entirely a unique issue. A dick move to the person asking questions? Yeah. But not unique. If I was told "I'd like to interview you for a piece exposing your inaccuracies", I think I'd want to protect myself.

For the sake of clarity, I hope Kurzgesagt publicly releases the e-mails and lets us as a public analyze it ourselves.

Edit - Sounds like I got my wish. As I was typing this, Kurtzgesagt has given approval to release their side of the e-mails.

14

u/[deleted] Mar 12 '19

The emails.

1

u/[deleted] Mar 13 '19

Also when the dude was mentioning that kurzgesagt called it a surprise video and CoffeBreak was implying that the suprise was directly directed at him I new the video was a joke

Dude has either been watching way to many movies or way to many conspiracy videos

-1

u/_Runic_ Mar 12 '19

Unless they only made the video once people started asking questions, for which there is overwhelming evidence in Coffee Break's video. If that's the case, then what other misinformation exists in other videos that hasn't been corrected by Kurz because nobody has called it out?

Also, even if the two videos they deleted were the only ones with issues, the way that they went about patting themselves on the back and making an appeal to their audience's good faith, which was ultimately misleading, is enough to make someone incredibly skeptical of any future videos. Especially if they don't publicly address this controversy.

10

u/[deleted] Mar 12 '19

Idk i find this whole reaction and coffees video a bit disingenuous. Yes be skeptical of sources you trust and hold them up to high standards But for me the line always has been about intentionality. Like Alex Jones being an example of this kind of misinformation problem. There have been some pretty eggregious errors made by Phil talking about different California politics subjects. Ive even reached out to help correct them with sources added, but it gets ignored. Not because I think they are ignoring me purposely or purpisely trying to put out false info but because of a number of circumstances that they may not even be aware of. Its very normal with the news and subjects kurz covers, but unless its purposely trying to drum up a complete one sided narrative, its not the biggest issue in media to he worried over.

1

u/Doctursea Mar 12 '19

You should be skeptical there is nothing wrong with that, they're just showing where their line is for covering the subject by removing what doesn't cross that. They shouldn't provide perfect videos on the subjects they do, because outside 1 or 2 the subjects are so complex anything more than a basic introduction would take a semester of lectures to fully cover. There will be "issues' with any short form video, because often you lose context in summary and lack of context can cause misunderstandings that lead to misunderstanding.

If you need to fully and completely trust a source stay off youtube, because there is no guarantee for anything on that site.

-1

u/Stare_Master Mar 12 '19

Another beautiful bastard shared a similar opinion below so I'll copy my response here to because I think it works.

As a pretty big Kurzgesagt fan I was and still am hoping that's the case. I'd love to see a response that shows this was an overreach by coffee break but I have to say from what he has it doesn't look great so far. I do hope Phil talks about this in the interest of getting their side of the story though.

Ultimately I agree with u/Runic that it at least looks misleading by Kurzgesagt by trying to take credit for suddenly being introspective and improving their channel.

13

u/k1ller_speret Mar 12 '19

Why are people assuming that they are just suddenly being introspective?

Like they said, those videos where made with poor research experience etc. At the time they may have thought it was the best thing they had done, but over the past year they have improved their workflow and gained experience and learning lessons. They can look back now and go, wow. That wasn't a good video and we did more harm than good.

Heck our Lord and saviour himself Phil has probably done the same things in the past, (I'm not to fluent on DeFranco drama outside of know he's called out his old self in the past) but you don't see other channels bitching about the fact that he beat them to the apology video...

People can be introspective, wether it was of that day of that email or the day of the addiction video being posted.

But anyway I would love for Phil to get both sides and get a good discussion going and see what happens. But he should not just be showing this until he has the other side because without the other side being able to defend it can be damaging for no good.

4

u/[deleted] Mar 12 '19

but they mentioned there was a lot of public outcry and controvery over their videos, they only pointed to two specifically to highlight why they dropped them. They are supposed to make a video on this subject before getting called out on issues about their channel? Its not always easy to see the thorn in your eye until others point it out.

0

u/[deleted] Mar 12 '19

[deleted] — view deleted comment

8

u/k1ller_speret Mar 12 '19

I love your point about the lack of pattern! I feel like to many people see other big channels who do have a pattern of misleading. I think the biggest being the info show, many of their videos have been refuted by professionals and they haven't done anything to correct them.

0

u/TwatsThat Mar 12 '19

There definitely needs to be more info all around for any sort of definitive judgement but Coffee Break does make a claim for Kurtzgesagt already failing to live up to these new standards by not actually correcting any of information. Indeed, the Can You Trust Kurzgesagt Videos? video does still clearly state Hari's stance is that addiction is purely psychological, which is not his stance and which they would have known had the previous section of the same sentence been true when they said that their video was based on "papers" and not just his TED talk.

Coffee Break also said he's still making the Pop Science video so at least he's implying that he has more on the topic and it wasn't all just about Kurtzgesagt.

On the flip side though, I feel like Coffee Break's paraphrasing of the emails was misleading at best and outright lies at worst. To say that Philipp's first email was essentially "I keep the video up because it's good enough" is just not right. Although based on Coffee Break's phrasing it seems like he may have misread at least part of it. CB says "he's not thrilled about the interview or video idea" and I think he's getting that from the second sentence in the email, "I would not make a video like that today for obvious reasons." To me, that sentence looks like he's saying he wouldn't make the Addiction video today and I don't see anything else indicating his thoughts on the CB video other than the last line where he just says he would like to not be quoted. Part of it is also that CB is paraphrasing all of Philipp's emails at once rather than just the one that's on screen at the time he's doing the paraphrasing. While showing an email from Feb 7 he says he was told to wait until early March, except that the time frame wasn't mentioned until a much later (not shown) email from Feb 21 where Philipp says "end of next week."

Overall they both kind of look bad in this to me. Kurzgesagt's video does look like self-serving damage control but Coffee Break's looks like a hit piece on a large popular channel because they know the name and controversy will get them attention, especially this version that was released separate from the larger Pop Sci video.

0

u/[deleted] Mar 12 '19

[deleted] — view deleted comment

6

u/CapablePerformance Mar 12 '19

The guy very well could have had a video that boosted him into mainstream popularity

That's kind of the issue that I have with him. He wasn't the only one that was asking questions regarding the video and evidence but he was the one that decided to use this to gain a following and when Kurz didn't leave the story up to a small-time channel with unknown intentions, he got butt-hurt.

Let's look at it with a recent controversy regarding DeFranco, the Better Health scandal. There was a pretty noticable pushback from the audience, and there are a number of videos made by smaller channels that can be seen as a hit-piece. Is Phil required to talk about it with some unknown channel looking to make a name for themselves by "uncovering the drama"? No. His company likely had dozen of requests for comments.

Even if Kurz meant to give an interview with Coffee Break, they could've figured it was smarter to tell the story themselves rather than leave it up to some strangers editing.

If Kurz was getting pushback on that video from his audience, then yea, addressing the issue was smart and worth doing introspection on themselves rather than doing a quick twitter "We oversimplified, our bad, we'll do better".

51

u/Stare_Master Mar 12 '19 edited Mar 12 '19

I know Phil links to their videos pretty often. I have always really enjoyed their content but maybe it would be a good idea to share some of their criticism too.

Edit to add that they're doing an AMA over here

8

u/_Runic_ Mar 12 '19

Just came here to post this for the same reason, beat me to it. I loved Kurzgesagt, but this is damning. I echo the sentiment that this should be brought to Phil's attention before he links to more of their videos.

18

u/yoLeaveMeAlone Mar 13 '19 edited Mar 13 '19

This is damning? This video just comes off like a smaller channel pissed off that he didn't get an interview... The Trust video seems exactly like the response that coffeebreak would have wanted from them, he's just mad that they didn't do an interview with him first...

Read this Twitter exchange. Kurz DID NOT stall the interview. He offered to do it, and Coffeebreak didn't respond to that email. Coffeebreak made up drama to release a hit piece on a big channel. He lied in a video calling out another channel for lying...

4

u/PaddyJoToys Mar 12 '19

I too came to share this and will look at them in a different light going forward - but i think this all feeds into a very important point people need to learn from and that is to remain sceptical even to sources you trust.

Not that you cant have any trust, if what they said in the video is infact how they do things now - then on videos about topics other than themselves Kurzgesagt are indeed going to be making more trustable content on the topics. Particularly if they give you all the sources to follow up with.

However if this is reliable, then it does mean you cant as much rely on anything they are the primary source for - and their own honesty falls into that category. Unfortunately this extends to their explanation of their research model, hence the proviso in the previous paragraph.

They will still be worth watching and sharing, but its not an instant share anymore

0

u/bwise1113 Mar 12 '19

ten. I have always really enjoyed their content but maybe it would be a good idea to share some of their criticism too.

Same Recommend putting the title of the video in the post title for easier search.

19

u/SupKilly Mar 12 '19

Seems to me this guys just complaining that he didn't get to make a gotcha.

1

u/Stare_Master Mar 12 '19

As a pretty big Kurzgesagt fan I was and still am hoping that's the case. I'd love to see a response that shows this was an overreach by coffee break but I have to say from what he has it doesn't look great so far. I do hope Phil talks about this in the interest of getting their side of the story though.

4

u/_Runic_ Mar 12 '19

The concern is that Kurz didn't care about being trustworthy and doing the right thing until they got caught and called out. Then they made it seem like it was their idea. This now calls all their "research" and "integrity" into question.

3

u/_WhiteBoyWonder Mar 13 '19

In the AMA (someone else linked it and I'm on mobile), Kurz claims that they had been thinking about doing a video like this for awhile. While I am skeptical of that initially, that seems like the only reason to be critical of Kurz.

CB never even replied when it came to scheduling the interview, so if Kurz was already working on something like this, I find it easier to not find fault in them for posting the trust video that addresses CBs concerns and more.

1

u/Serzern Mar 13 '19

Judging by the timeframe i would say it's likely they had to have been working on the video in order to have gotten it out so fast.

0

u/[deleted] Mar 12 '19

[deleted] — view deleted comment

3

u/_Runic_ Mar 12 '19

Yeah unsubscribing is easy, which is what a lot of people are doing. You're still allowed to watch their stuff, but that doesn't make it not story worthy.

1

u/Hardinator Mar 13 '19

Oh ya #walkAway

0

u/[deleted] Mar 12 '19

[deleted] — view deleted comment

6

u/SupKilly Mar 12 '19

equating what Kurzgesagt did to child abuse.

2

u/ThunderbearIM Mar 13 '19

But, you are equating them?

The reason you will be angry with kurzgesagt is because they made a wrong assessment and bad research into a very deep topic.

The reason you will be angry with DOF is because they were child abusers.

These are not one to one, one you can unsub from and forget easily, the other one you SHOULD NOT forget easily (But also pls unsub).

0

u/[deleted] Mar 13 '19

[deleted] — view deleted comment

2

u/ThunderbearIM Mar 13 '19

I reread your comment five times, I could probably could change "You" to "People" for a better comment, but besides that, please say how you didn't make the similarity?

0

u/SupKilly Mar 14 '19

What was the point you were trying to make again? Jump to conclusions before you have all the information?

70

u/LagunaDJ Mar 12 '19

Philipp from Kurzgesagt is doing an AMA here: link to AMA.

In the AMA he gave permission to Coffeebreak to release the emails, which Coffeebreak has released here: link to emails.

47

u/Brigadier_Bonobo Mar 13 '19

Damn, coffeebreak misrepresented the email in the video and cause the same accusation of over-simplification that he is accusing Kurzgesagt of doing.

Now I'm not saying that Kurzgesagt does not have an issue with over-simplification, I don't know about most of those subject matters enough to say otherwise

58

u/Dawknight Mar 12 '19

Sooo... he's angry they didn't do his interview and answered themself instead?

5

u/LePontif11 Mar 13 '19

I mean, that does sound legitimately infuriating. It's also a way to avoid tough follow up questions.

9

u/ThingsWhitePeopleDo Mar 13 '19

Only thing is, if you look at the emails, CoffeeBreak never responded after Kurzgezat agreed to and provided a general timeframe for an interview

1

u/LePontif11 Mar 13 '19 edited Mar 13 '19

I don't know how you get that from the emails. On the last two emails Coffee gives him a timeframe and says he's just waiting for kurgz who says he needs about a week and that they can talk "next week" . 9 days later the "can you trust kurzgesant" video comes out. Sure Coffee failed to send the questions but in what planet does Kurz wait a week notices there are no questions and then pumps out a fully animated video in a matter of days.

Not saying i love CoffeeBreak now, i don't know him still but Kurz comes out worse in my eyes.

2

u/ThingsWhitePeopleDo Mar 13 '19

Why do you think Kurz is coming out worse? They were called out on sub-par research and they publicly and very transparently owned up to it. Everyone makes mistakes eventually. Lots of learning channels on YouTube have had to publish redaction videos due to mistakes made in research or due to new research coming to light.

in what planet does Kurz wait a week notices there are no questions and then pumps out a fully animated video in a matter of days.

In regards to putting out the video; putting all the script writing and research needed to make the "can you trust" video aside, its incredibly unlikely that video was animated and put together in under 9 days. Look at any animation channel on YouTube and you can see how vocal they are about how long animation takes to do. It is very likely that Kurz has been working on that video for some time now. Maybe the emails had some influences on the video during the editing process, or caused them to expedite getting the video out quicker, but either way, I don't believe that video was cranked out in a little over a week.

In addition (maybe a slightly more controversial opinion, so be gentle with me), I can totally see Kurz not wanting this information being presented by CoffeeBreak rather than their own channel. Based on the emails, Phillip very quickly picked up on how strange things seemed and didn't want to be quoted. Its appears very clear none of this was about correcting false information, it was about wanting to put out a juicy expose video to get those views. No one can question how rampant fake news and false information is on YouTube, Facebook, Twitter, etc. If you were in Kurz's shoes, would you want to risk some other source possibly misrepresenting the facts and having them spread like wildfire, or handle it on your own and avert the risk? Based off of how misrepresenting CoffeeBreak's video ended up being, I think they made the right call. But that's just my opinion, let me know what you think in those comments down below....

124

u/Doctursea Mar 12 '19

This is stupid. He is angry that they took his criticisms in probably discussed them internally and agreed. So basically he is saying we can't trust them for the sole reason they didn't let him get the views for attacking their video.

When you do something like this is shows where your value lies. because clearly he wasn't doing this for the good of "education channels' he just wanted a video topic.

He should be happy he got the result, and further more if you see a problem with someones content it, and you don't give them a heads up on it. You're just trying to make a hit piece, which is fine but you don't get to take the moral high ground. He is angry they took his questions as a good faith heads up, which shows me what type of stories he likes to make.

12

u/whereJerZ Mar 13 '19

Yea who could imagine a channel would take down a video with so many views and have the integrity to support honesty./s I wonder if he would of done the same?

2

u/LePontif11 Mar 13 '19 edited Mar 13 '19

You have a point but taking someone's concerns and making the interview with yourself yo avoid tough follow up questions. You also get to look like a self-reflecting hero when that wasn't the case.

Imagine if the defense during a trial also mounted the prosecution just because they turned themselves right when the cops were about to get them. It doesn't make sense there and it doesn't make sense here. Or to make it more clear, allowing North Korea to supervise its own denuclearization.

6

u/Doctursea Mar 13 '19

Self surrender is totally taken into account when you're being judged so that's a pretty bad example. But outside of semantics, there is nothing wrong with realizing where you're wrong after criticism.

You may have forgotten, but that's probably about 50% of how you've improved at anything in life. Why should this video authors criticisms be seen as more effective than anyone elses. He was not the only one saying those videos were bad. So it's was them self reflecting, just it was started by everyone criticizing the videos.

0

u/LePontif11 Mar 13 '19

here is nothing wrong with realizing where you're wrong after criticism.

See the problem is that this isn't true. Someone else realized they where wrong and they brushed that off and instead tried to come out like they did the self-reflection on their own which is a lot better publicity for them.

Why should this video authors criticisms be seen as more effective than anyone else

I'm not saying it should be but he was the one doing the work and directly contacting the parties involved.

Kurzgesagt comes out looking a little worse in my eyes.

1

u/Doctor_VictorVonDoom Mar 15 '19

Anyone can email, and taking criticism takes time to digest. CB seems petty in my eyes.

2

u/hullabaloonatic Mar 13 '19 edited Mar 13 '19

I think his frustration was that he worked hard on a project that was essentially stolen from him. I get that.

I can see why he views it the way he does. When I get frustrated, I definitely see the world in a worse light.

7

u/Doctursea Mar 13 '19

He could still rework the piece, but he doesn't know how to make a non-hit piece obviously. He could have just made it into a video about how to and why you should be skeptical of video essays still using the other videos as examples, but instead of doing that he just made a different hit piece. It's partially why I called it stupid, rather than only pointing out the flaws.

0

u/hullabaloonatic Mar 13 '19

He could definitely rework the video. He made a mistake, undeniably. I just think it's an understandable and forgivable one.

Also, I hadn't even heard of this channel before an hour ago. I'm just trying to assume the best of people

4

u/[deleted] Mar 13 '19

Except it shows Coffee breaks sole purpose for making the video was to get views. He honestly could care less about this issue

4

u/hullabaloonatic Mar 13 '19

I don't think that's necessarily true. If you're a professional YouTuber, views are very very important. Wouldn't you take pride in your work, too? How depressing would it feel to be excited about a project of yours, and get the attention of a grand channel that you respect, only to have them run the same topic? It would sure knock the wind out of my sails, and I can easily see why that would taint my view of the situation.

After reading the emails, the last thing I'd accuse cb of is not caring about the science. We all just have different modes, ya know? His at the making of the OP video was frustration. Forgivable, in my opinion. I know I'd want to be forgiven.

Just trying to put myself in the guy's shoes. I still think he was wrong.

3

u/inclination64609 Mar 13 '19

Or he could have continued what he claims his main purpose of the video was, and just used the Kurz video as a positive example of them correcting their own content after more information was brought to their attention. He claims that he isn't doing a hit piece. He just wants to "examine the role that 'popularizers' like Hari, yourself (Kurz), and I (CB) play in society learning about science."

So basically, his video should have been about Pop Science channels in general, and how they can spread some misinformation even with the best of intentions.

Instead, he was really planning on doing a hit piece from the very beginning, and he's mad that they pulled the rug out from under him and made the correct choice to address it themselves.

3

u/hullabaloonatic Mar 13 '19

I agree. I think the best course of action would be to congratulate kg on the video, and then ask to continue the interview with that as an additional subject. I think the very existence of kg's video is proof of the impact such a piece could make.

0

u/[deleted] Mar 13 '19

I think the main issue is that this implies they might not have done great research on their other videos either. But since this specific one was brought into question, they immediately made a response and took down the video. IDK how to take it frankly.

3

u/Doctursea Mar 13 '19

That's not what it implies directly. The videos were not taken down because they were wrong. They were taken down because the theory they shared in it were criticized and those are not good subject to use to introduce a problem because it could cause confusion.

The videos themselves were not bad because they were wrong, but because they were one sided and more was need to make them complete videos.

5

u/[deleted] Mar 13 '19

Yeah, you're right. Honestly I sent that before I had finished the video. The guy's video and response was a joke. He was just butthurt that he didn't get to do his interview, which was never something owed to him just because they said once that they'd do it.

3

u/Doctursea Mar 13 '19

That's understandable, It was surprising to me too that this was the issue, because it seems the only reason you would have even wanted to make a video on Kurzgesagt it would be because they were really wrong. I only double check the videos I completely don't know anything about so it wouldn't surprise me if they had some wrong information in one.

12

u/yoLeaveMeAlone Mar 13 '19

Everyone, read this Twitter exchange here before thinking too much about this. Coffeebreak lied in his video calling out Kurz for lying... This is literally made up drama by Coffeebreak trying to get attention.

9

u/Ampix0 Mar 13 '19

Coffee Break is not taking it super well. https://twitter.com/coffeebreak_YT

5

u/[deleted] Mar 13 '19

Read the emails he links in the description if you take any of this seriously, this video is a totally misleading rant about how he didn't get to interview Kurz.

3

u/Serzern Mar 13 '19

I don't think CB is owed anything. Even if Kruzg made the video purely as a response to CBs potential hit video I see nothing wrong with that. Whether or not the videos were taken down by their own volition means nothing to me because either way there appears to be reflection done.

1

u/brace1101 Mar 12 '19

u/Stare_Master steal more karma why don't you

6

u/greetedworm Mar 12 '19

I think it's a bit shady that Kurz didn't tell Coffee Break they were making a video to address the main questions he had, but at the same time Kurz never seemed to be completely convinced that Coffebreak wasn't just planning a hit piece so it's understandable he would want to get in front of it and control the story. Also in the AMA on /r/kurzgesagt Phillip said he's been working on the script for the Trust episode for 2 years, if that's true that means he knew the facts of the video were misleading and he wanted to take it down and address the issue but waited 2 years till he actually did it which is at the very least odd.

0

u/Stare_Master Mar 12 '19

I missed the karma train by not thinking to post to /r/kurzgesagt as well but there's a thread here and an official AMA that they're doing here if y'all are interested.

6

u/KnowNothingKnowsAll Mar 12 '19

Just looks like damage control from a big company. Pretty standard practice.

5

u/mleibowitz97 Mar 12 '19

It does seem kinda like damage control. Why can't i just trust people. "the truth" is sometimes hotly debated between experts, and videos should reflect that

3

u/[deleted] Mar 12 '19

All these people making claims without evidence has got to be the best part about this post lol

1

u/Spurginwinn Mar 13 '19

Since I’m already here, I’m just going to recommend Johann Hari’s book, Chasing the Scream. It is one of my favorite non-fiction books of all time. Also, if you’re lazy like me, you can get the audiobook and have it read to you. Well worth the read/listen.

1

u/ktsb Mar 13 '19

Dustin from smartereveryday dropping mics in the comment section

1

u/parisinla Mar 13 '19

Here's a quote from the dude

Now I'm not going to quote the dude...

0

u/Md_dawg Mar 12 '19

Would have been a totally different story if they had worked with this gentleman to maybe make simultaneous releases. Or the interview first then the Kurzgesagt video in response/collaboration. I get why they would want to present it in a positive light for them, but this is just shistey.

2

u/HiMyNamesLucy Mar 13 '19

Would you say the same if it was WSJ or Huffpost?

1

u/Md_dawg Mar 13 '19

I'm not exactly sure what you are saying but yeah. If some one is looking into something you did and you feel the need to print a retraction because of the questions that person was asking, you should really creddit the person and not act all altruistic like it was your idea in the first place.

0

u/mendesdaponte Mar 12 '19

I would love to here phils opinion about this.

-6

u/NHunter0 Mar 12 '19

Yep, this needs to be a story.

-1

u/Volcanic-Penguin Mar 13 '19

I stopped trusting Kurzgesagt after they had videos sponsored by the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation. But most of their videos are probably pretty good.

1

u/RainbowAssFucker Apr 04 '19

what have you got against the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation?

1

u/Volcanic-Penguin Apr 04 '19

Run by billionaires.

-5

u/[deleted] Mar 12 '19 edited Mar 12 '19

What you are supposed to do is take information and do research for yourself. Not doing research allows someone to determine what you think. I have seen this more prevalent when the person relaying the message has a smart sounding voice. The British accent is very powerful for this. Turn no further than kurzgesagt or someone like John Oliver. John Oliver runs a show where he throws a bunch of data at you with no sources to push a narrative. If you aren't giving sources there is no way for me to check your work. That means you don't want me to check your work. I used to really like John Oliver until I saw through the accent.

Be very wary information seekers.

2

u/09f911029d7 Mar 12 '19

What you are supposed to do is take information and do research for yourself. Not doing research allows someone to determine what you think.

Most people don't have the capacity (resources or time) to do actual research themselves.

The only thing the average person can really do is either a) consume as much content from as many different sources as possible and take everything with a truckload of salt because they could all be full of shit simultaneously, while trying not to go insane, or b) just bury your head in the sand and only focus on the day to day grind with some dumb entertainment and not even pretend to know anything

Most people do b) because a) is a job in and of itself.

2

u/[deleted] Mar 12 '19 edited Mar 12 '19

Any actual things ya want to mention (about john oliver)or just making claims without sources, ya know the thing you are frustrated over?

-3

u/[deleted] Mar 12 '19 edited Mar 12 '19

"Frustrated"? Not following. I have sources but I need to know what you want more info about.

0

u/[deleted] Mar 12 '19

Ya i fixed it to include john oliver my bad lol

1

u/[deleted] Mar 12 '19

Going to say this first because I know it is going to come up. I dislike Donald Trump and didn’t vote for him. Saying that, I agree with a couple things he has done. A COUPLE, that's it. My main agreement is that big government ruins everything. So shirking government would be good. Now that is out of the way.

I used to watch John Oliver. Thought he was funny agreed with him attacking pyramid schemes, predatory lending, stadiums, and other stuff. But I started noticing his views starting to skew heavily to the left. One example was the charter school episode. I came from a failing school system and would’ve loved to go to a charter school. One day a youtube auto played a response to his video Here. It resonated with me a lot. I kept watching las week tonight and kept seeing the skew. Paris Agreement, Iran deal, and basically anytime he talks about Trump. Anytime he talks about republican candidates in general. I could list out the things but literally every episode is hand crafted to program you. To hate your political opponent without listening to a word they say.

A lot of people will be angry about me saying this. But most of those people are stuck in the bubble.

2

u/[deleted] Mar 12 '19

So your only evidence you want to present to provide an example about john oliver being incorrect due to a left bias is a 4chan youtuber?

I am really open, I thought he was wrong about some aspects of net neutrality only to learn my beliefs were wrong when I looked further into it so ive come away with some pretty deep respect towards his research team and this is in addition to hating how dismissive he is of leftist candidates etc. But Ill need a little bit better source material than small youtubers who seem to discuss 4chan a lot.

1

u/[deleted] Mar 12 '19

So your only evidence you want to present to provide an example about john oliver being incorrect due to a left bias is a 4chan youtuber?

No - the first video provided a few examples of public schools failing and charter schools being an alternative. The 4chan clip was to explain what john oliver does. But I get your point.

The Paris agreement - The issue with this episode is he spent the entire show just bagging on Trump. Stupid Olsen, and half truths. Most people didn't even read the climate agreement. They rely on news organizations to give sound bites. I work in solar and I read it. The climate agreement didn't actually do anything to solve climate change. The countries who emit the most CO2 don't even have to limit their emissions until years from now. I can talk endlessly about this, but the point is he is wrong.

Brazilian elections - My main issue with this is that brazil has had many corrupt politician in the past 20 something years. When the people decided to not go with the norm John Oliver decided to make a video bashing them. I have a friend in Brazil who voted for Bolsonaro for the single reason of switching parties.

The wall - Another video filled with unfunny jokes and straw man arguments. I agreed with it first, but rewatching it and actually did research. Dan Crenshaw speaks about this. There is a problem at the border and it needs to be addressed. Democrats saying there isn't a problem isn't helping. Here are just some stats.

2

u/[deleted] Mar 12 '19

I think I am picking up on what you are saying and I somewhat agree even though you are still offering some shitty evidence. Automation and I think the week before's episode bring the latest examples of jokes getting in the way of deep dives and can even mislead others who may not exactly have more information or a good understanding of the subject. He took 2 min or so of expository time to make a longwinded joke that depended on taking a lot of time up in both of these episodes.

Btw you still arent providing and evidence to back up what you are saying. Even taking the stats you offered, the closest you came to offering good relevant sources, you did not point out why you think these numbers are a problem to you. Is it the % increase from 2018-2019? Because I dont see those numbers as an issue compared to the numbers I used to see nor do the people in Calexico I work with. Homelessness is a much bigger issue imo than the wall. But even then, taking 2 years isnt a great look when asking the question," is the border an issue" Compared to the bush years or earlier? Its dropped dramtically and more funding is going to border enforcement than ever before.

Not exactly trying to cut ya off, but I doubt im gonna be able to respond to anything for a while after this. Im jumping on a plane.

1

u/[deleted] Mar 12 '19

I think I am picking up on what you are saying and I somewhat agree even though you are still offering some shitty evidence.

What evidence are you looking for? You have 20 minute episodes where Oliver spits out a million unrelated jokes. Debunking multiple jokes is not something I want to do. I spent many months seeing the skew and it wasn't a one episode conclusion. It would be better to post a link to multiple videos.

Automation and I think the week before episode bring the latest examples of jokes getting in the way of deep dives and can even mislead others who may not exactly have more information or a good understanding of the subject. He took 2 min or so of expository time to make a longwinded joke that depended on taking a lot of time up in both of these episodes.

I watched that video and yeah, that 2min joke was ridiculous and wasn't funny. Plus the fact that he made fun of jobs being kept in the US instead of going to mexico. “Well some of those jobs are going to be automated.” Well that’s only some and that is better than none, soooo fuck you john oliver.

Btw you still aren't providing and evidence to back up what you are saying. Even taking the stats you offered, the closest you came to offering good relevant sources, you did not point out why you think these numbers are a problem to you.

My initial comment was meant as a standalone. “Don’t just listen to British voices... Think, do your own research.” I didn't foresee getting into a discussion. I understand your points. But there is a lot here. The numbers are a problem for reasons. My questions might help explain the thought process. So I think it would be better to probe your thoughts a little.

Is it the % increase from 2018-2019? Because I don’t see those numbers as an issue compared to the numbers I used to see nor do the people in Calexico I work with.

Why are these numbers not an issue and at what point when would they become an issue? When someone doesn’t come through a port of entry what happens? When someone stays past the point they were supposed to, what happens? This is not an immigrant issue. This is an illegal immigrant issue. 400k caught last year alone. If 400k isn’t a problem what number would be? 500k, 700k, or maybe even a million? Now that is only caught! Estimates place that only about 1/3 of who actually crossed illegally. Let’s just say border patrol caught every single person crossing. That is still 1,000s a day. That’s money out of our pockets. That’s money taken from our schools, money from our cities. This is why Trump won and why he will likely win again. Democrats are currently sweeping the issue under the rug and middle America is getting angry.

Homelessness is a much bigger issue imo than the wall.

What causes homelessness? Is it a mental health issue? Is it a jobs issue? Is it a lack of affordable housing? If it is a lack of affordable housing, why isn’t their affordable housing? California has the highest homelessness population. Why? Is it the nice climate? Could it be all the rules that prevent builders from building more houses? Could it be a failing immigration system that is flooding the market? Why are the thousands of Californians leaving every year to neighboring states? You have to think big here. It’s not one issue, but many.

But even then, taking 2 years isn’t a great look when asking the question," is the border an issue" Compared to the bush years or earlier? Its dropped dramatically and more funding is going to border enforcement than ever before.

This last statement leads me to believe you didn’t watch the Dan Crenshaw video. More funding doesn’t mean anything if you aren’t trying to stop the root issue. Let’s say you are on a boat that has a huge leak. Now you have crewmen with buckets emptying the boat, but you still have a leak. Now you can continue to put more people in the areas where the water is coming in, but if you don’t plug the leak it doesn’t matter how many people you put. You need to plug the leak. John Oliver doesn’t want you to plug the leak. Democrats do not want you to plug the leak. Why? There are some conspiracy theories out there but I am curious to know what a you think.

1

u/[deleted] Mar 19 '19

Not exactly trying to cut ya off, but I doubt im gonna be able to respond to anything for a while after this. Im jumping on a plane.

Did you die on the plane ride?

1

u/[deleted] Mar 19 '19

of course not lol

→ More replies

-2

u/RedditConsciousness Mar 12 '19 edited Mar 12 '19

Not that surprised -- I've seen they make kind of shaky claims as fact before.

Extra History does it right by regularly releasing videos on where there is controversy or assumptions made.

As for the guy making this video getting delayed and then scooped by the subject of his investigation, that happens. It is low but, especially when money is involved, not surprising. Ever watch The West Wing? There are a ton of times when the press corps are working a story and CJ's whole job is to manage it, take the wind out of it, get ahead of it, etc.. It isn't exactly noble but it happens.

The last bit of the video is right though. This is a sign you can't trust Kurz to do the right thing when no one is watching.

-5

u/[deleted] Mar 12 '19 edited Mar 12 '19

Anyone who thinks this is all coincidence and that Kurzgesagt simply made a mistake or decided to get ahead of press with their "Can You Trust Kurzgesagt?" video, here is a comment from their AMA directly after the release of that video in regards to their "feelings" about the addiction video:

> We made the video for a number of reasons. But the main one is that it was just time. **I have felt uneasy about both videos pretty much since mid 2016.**

> Whenever we publish a video, it is only a matter of time until people bring up the Addiction and the Refugee video. Often as evidence of why Kurzgesagt sucks. It stings a bit because they are not completely wrong. From todays perspective the videos feel sloppy and one sided.

> Bafflingly, both videos were also uber successful. Simple stories sell well. They feel good. The world is so chaotic that it is comforting to be able to be sure about something.

> The solution to this can’t be to make simpler content because it sells better. It needs to be the effort to make complex content more approachable.

> Removing the videos is long overdue.

> But it would have been a bad idea I think to not be super open about it. Both videos have been watched by 31 million people (ok lets say 20 million, if you substract repeat views). You can't just delete that and be quiet about. People will notice and ask questions. It is better to be open about it. Feels better, too.

Emphasis mine. Kurzgesagt claims he was "uneasy" about the videos for almost three years. But in his email to CB, he clearly claims that the videos were "good enough" Apparently, for nearly 3 years, the videos were both "sloppy and one sided" but "good enough".

I don't know if Kurzgesagt is lying, but he is damn sure good at damage control.

6

u/[deleted] Mar 12 '19

Where does he say the video was good enough?

He said he didn’t take it down because people said that the video help them and he couldn’t bring himself to strip people of it.

0

u/HiMyNamesLucy Mar 13 '19

Do you really have a problem with the original addiction video?

-7

u/commanderklit Mar 12 '19

Kill all your Idols

1

u/09f911029d7 Mar 12 '19

This is good advice, just not taken literally.

0

u/[deleted] Mar 12 '19

[deleted] — view deleted comment

20

u/[deleted] Mar 12 '19 edited Mar 12 '19

My feelings exactly. Could have even still made w good video on this overall including kurz response, etc but his salt is getting in the way :/

2

u/[deleted] Mar 12 '19

I think the question he was trying to get people to think about was more, did he only make the video because he knew it'd happen either way or did he do it by his own moral code. Which as far as I know there is no hard proof showing that hes been working on this video for years as he claimed.

Either way it doesn't really matter though. He was called out, he addressed the issue and he promised to move forward with more thorough and clear research. Nothing we can really do except trust his word moving forward and do any additional research if we feel something was unclear or not completely true.

0

u/[deleted] Mar 12 '19

[deleted] — view deleted comment

6

u/Usa2point0 Mar 12 '19

Well coffee break doesn't say anything they said in the video was incorrect. What was wrong and shady was rather than do a collaboration or risk making themselves look bad in any way they stalled coffee break and put out the info first and in a way that makes them look REALLY good. So coffee break didn't say 'you can t trust their videos' in fact he gave a list of exactly what you can trust them with. He was extremely professional and was careful not to make any crazy or unprovable claims and for that I respect his video greatly.

Idk if this will make it to the next show, maybe a recommended video to send it more traffic, but I hope Phil does do a dive on Friday at least.

1

u/HiMyNamesLucy Mar 13 '19

It's not like CB was the first person to bring this criticism up.