YouTube is following in the potentially dangerous steps of Meta and X (formerly Twitter) by relaxing its content moderation policies. New internal training materials viewed by The New York Times instruct moderators to leave videos live if up to half its content violates YouTube's policies, an increase from a quarter of it. The platform introduced the new policy in mid-December, a month after President Trump was re-elected. 

The new guidelines reflect what YouTube deems as "public interest." These areas include discussing or debating elections, movements, race, gender, immigration and more. "Recognizing that the definition of 'public interest' is always evolving, we update our guidance for these exceptions to reflect the new types of discussion we see on the platform today," Nicole Bell, a YouTube spokesperson, told The New York Times. "Our goal remains the same: to protect free expression on YouTube while mitigating egregious harm." 

The platform has reportedly removed 22 percent more videos due to hateful and abusive content than last year. It's not clear how many videos were reported or would have been removed under the previous guidelines. 

YouTube reportedly told moderators to now value keeping content up if it's a debate between freedom of expression and risk. For example, they were shown a video called "RFK Jr. Delivers SLEDGEHAMMER Blows to Gene-Altering JABS" which falsely stated that Covid vaccines can change people's genes. However, YouTube told the moderators that public interest "outweighs the harm risk" and the video should stay up. It has since been removed, though the reason why is unclear.

Other videos allowed to remain online included one with a slur aimed at a transgender person and one in which a commentator discussed a graphic demise for former South Korean president Yoon Suk Yeol. 

Engadget has reached out to YouTube for comment.

This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/entertainment/youtube/youtube-now-allows-more-harmful-misinformation-on-its-platform-133002902.html?src=rss

©

© ASSOCIATED PRESS

Scams using AI deepfakes of celebrities have become an increasingly prominent issue for Meta over the last couple of years. Now, the Oversight Board has weighed in and has seemingly confirmed what other critics have said: Meta isn't doing enough to enforce its own rules, and makes it far too easy for scammers to get away with these schemes.

"Meta is likely allowing significant amounts of scam content on its platforms to avoid potentially overenforcing a small subset of genuine celebrity endorsements," the board wrote in its latest decision. "At-scale reviewers are not empowered to enforce this prohibition on content that establishes a fake persona or pretends to be a famous person in order to scam or defraud."

That conclusion came as the result of a case involving an ad for an online casino-style game called Plinko that used an AI-manipulated video of Ronaldo Nazário, a retired Brazilian soccer player. The ad, which according to the board showed obvious signs of being fake, was not removed by Meta even after it was reported as a scam more than 50 times. Meta later removed the ad, but not the underlying Facebook post behind it until the Oversight Board agreed to review the case. It was viewed more than 600,000 times.

The board says that the case highlights fundamental flaws in how Meta approaches content moderation for reported scams involving celebrities and public figures. The board says that Meta told its members that "it enforces the policy only on escalation to ensure the person depicted in the content did not actually endorse the product" and that individual reviewers' "interpretation of what constitutes a ‘fake persona’ could vary across regions and introduce inconsistencies in enforcement.” The result, according to the Oversight Board, is that a "significant" amount of scam content is likely slipping through the cracks.

In its sole recommendation to Meta, the board urged the company should update its internal guidelines, empower content reviewers to identify such scams and train them on "indicators" of AI-manipulated content. In a statement, a spokesperson for Meta said that "many of the Board's claims are simply inaccurate" and pointed to a test it began last year that uses facial recognition technology to fight "celeb-bait" scams.

“Scams have grown in scale and complexity in recent years, driven by ruthless cross-border criminal networks," the spokesperson said. "As this activity has become more persistent and sophisticated, so have our efforts to combat it. We’re testing the use of facial recognition technology, enforcing aggressively against scams, and empowering people to protect themselves through many different on platform safety tools and warnings. While we appreciate the Oversight Board’s views in this case, many of the Board's claims are simply inaccurate and we will respond to the full recommendation in 60 days in accordance with the bylaws.”

Scams using AI deepfakes of celebrities has become a major problem for Meta as AI tech gets cheaper and more easily accessible. Earlier this year, I reported that dozens of pages were running ads featuring deepfakes of Elon Musk and Fox News personalities promoting supplements that claimed to cure diabetes. Some of these pages repeatedly ran hundreds of versions of these ads with seemingly few repercussions. Meta disabled some of the pages after my reporting, but similar scam ads persist on Facebook to this day. Actress Jamie Lee Curtis also recently publicly slammed Mark Zuckerberg for not removing a deepfaked Facebook ad that featured her (Meta removed the ad after her public posts).

The Oversight Board similarly highlighted the scale of the problem in this case, noting that it found thousands of video ads promoting the Plinko app in Meta's Ad Library. It said that several of these featured AI deepfakes, including ads featuring another Brazilian soccer star, Cristiano Ronaldo, and Meta's own CEO Mark Zuckerberg.

The Oversight Board isn't the only group that's raised the alarm about scams on Meta's platforms. The Wall Street Journal recently reported that Meta "accounted for nearly half of all reported scams on Zelle for JPMorgan Chase between the summers of 2023 and 2024" and that "British and Australian regulators have found similar levels of fraud originating on Meta’s platforms." The paper noted that Meta is "reluctant" to add friction to its ad-buying process and that the company "balks" at banning advertisers, even those with a history of conducting scams.

This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/social-media/the-oversight-board-says-meta-isnt-doing-enough-to-fight-celeb-deepfake-scams-194636203.html?src=rss

©

© ASSOCIATED PRESS

TikTok no longer shows search results for the hashtag #SkinnyTok. Critics who supported this block said some videos with that label were promoting disordered eating and other unhealthy or risky diet behaviors. We've reached out to TikTok for comment on this development. 

France's Minister of State for Digital Affairs Clara Chappaz was one of the politicians leading the pushback against this particular hashtag. She has been campaigning against #SkinnyTok with both French and EU regulators since April. "These videos promoting extreme thinness are revolting and absolutely unacceptable," Chappaz said. "Digital tools are marvellous in terms of progress and freedom, but badly used they can shatter lives … the social networks cannot escape their responsibility."

A TikTok spokesperson provided Engadget with the following statement: "We regularly review our safety measures to address evolving risks and have blocked search results for #skinnytok since it has become linked to unhealthy weight loss content. We continue to restrict videos from teen accounts and provide health experts and information in TikTok Search."

The company also notes that when people search for the term now, no results are displayed and users are instead directed to resources. As for when this content started cropping up, Tiktok says that it detected an increase of usage earlier in the year, but things spiked in March in April, at which it started taking more action like the aforementioned search changes and direction to resource content. It also started limiting related search suggestions and made the content ineligible for teen users.

While blocking search results for potentially harmful hashtags is a positive step, it only places hurdles in the path of people who want to seek out similar videos. "Users are savvy," Cornell University professor Brooke Erin Duffy told The New York Times. "They know how to work these platforms and how to evade their content moderation systems."

A block on one hashtag is just the latest in TikTok's piecemeal approach toward content that could encourage eating disorders. In 2020 it placed restrictions on ads that might "promote a negative or harmful body image," such as fasting apps and weight loss supplements. TikTok began a partnership with the National Eating Disorder Association in 2021 to offer more resources for users with eating disorders. Later that year, it also introduced a new approach to the For You page in an effort to reduce the impact of watching too many repeated clips on a negative topic.

Update, June 4, 2025, 2:41PM ET: This story was updated with a statement and additional details from TikTok.

This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/social-media/tiktok-now-blocks-search-results-for-skinnytok-222836828.html?src=rss

©

© REUTERS / Reuters

Nebraska is the latest state to crack down on how kids can use social media. The state's governor, Jim Pillen, recently signed into law a package of bills aimed at restricting certain social media features that keep kids hooked on the platform. The final bill signed, called the Age-Appropriate Online Design Code Act, will require companies to offer time limits on usage, restrict certain categories of content and provide chronological feeds instead of algorithmic ones that promote infinite scrolling.

The Age-Appropriate Online Design Code Act, also known as LB504, details that social media companies can only collect the minimum amount of personal data from younger users, and offers parents more tools to limit how their children use their accounts. Along with those restrictions, the law prohibits any ads related to gambling, alcohol, tobacco or drugs from reaching kids on social media. 

Alongside LB504, the signed package of bills includes LB140 that limits student use of smartphones in schools, LB383 that requires social media companies to verify the age of its users and require parental consent for creating accounts, and LB172 that creates criminal penalties for AI-generated pornography.

"Collectively, all these bills have an incredible impact on helping our teachers and giving our schools the opportunity to teach our kids, instead of being disrupted in the classroom," Pillen said in a press release. "They also provide parents with the tools they need to protect our kids from big tech online companies and predators."

The law is set to go into effect January 1, 2026, and any companies that violate these new regulations will face civil penalties. Nebraska is the latest state to restrict social media usage for minors, but Texas is also trying to pass a similar ban. With more efforts to regulate social media, NetChoice, an Internet advocacy organization whose members include Google, Meta and X, has voiced criticism of these states' efforts, arguing that they infringe on First Amendment rights and user privacy. In 2022, California signed a similar law meant to protect underage users, but it has since been in a legal battle following a lawsuit filed by NetChoice that claims a violation of free speech rights.

This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/social-media/a-new-nebraska-law-wants-to-make-social-media-less-addictive-for-kids-171510432.html?src=rss

©

© Office of Governor Jim Pillen

Amazon is testing a new feature that involves AI-generated hosts talking through product summaries. It looks fairly similar to Google’s audio overviews, which also include AI-generated hosts that seem plucked from a middling podcast.

Amazon says that these "AI shopping experts help save time by compiling research and providing product highlights for customers from product pages, reviews and insights." This leads me to an obvious question. Amazon is notorious for hosting fake reviews. Some studies suggest that fake reviews account for more than 40 percent of the sum total. Do these AI hosts pull from those reviews? 

Amazon reached out to Engadget to note that it has "zero tolerance" for fake reviews and that it has "robust and long-standing policies that prohibit review abuse." The company also boasts that "more than 99 percent of products viewed in our store contain only authentic reviews." It didn't say if the AI hosts include an additional layer of security to protect against fake reviews. 

Each audio summary will remind you that it was generated by AI, just before an introduction from the "expert" hosts. Amazon says these hosts are "like having helpful friends discuss potential purchases to make your shopping easier."

You might be able to try this out right now. It's currently available to some US customers on the mobile app for certain products, like this Ninja Blender, OSEA Undaria Algae Body Oil, SHOKZ OpenRun Pro headphones and a couple of other items. Just tap the "Hear the highlights" button under the product. Amazon has stated it'll be rolling this out to more customers and more products in the near future.

I can see this being a boon for those with visual impairment issues, but I listened to a couple of summaries and they certainly don't save any time. I could peruse reviews, look at product information and even conduct a web search of my own in a fraction of the time it took the friendly experts to complete their spiel.

The company says this feature is useful when "multitasking or on the go" but I don't tend to mindlessly spend money in that way. Do you? This seems like another AI thingamabob that nobody really asked for, but maybe it'll find a niche somewhere. Again, this could be seriously useful for the visually impaired, but that's not how Amazon is pitching it.

This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/ai/amazon-is-testing-ai-generated-hosts-that-talk-customers-through-product-features-153112886.html?src=rss

©

© Amazon

The FTC just rested its case following weeks of testimony in a landmark antitrust case against Meta. But before Meta can begin its defense, the company's lawyers have opted for another move: asking the judge to throw out the case entirely.

The company filed a motion on Thursday asking US District judge James Boasberg to toss out the FTC's case, arguing that the regulator has not proved that Meta acted anticompetitively. "Meta has made two promising mobile apps with uncertain prospect: two of the most successful apps in the world, enjoyed by approximately half of the planet's population (including hundreds of millions of U.S. consumers) on demand, in unlimited quantities, all for free," the filing says, "The FTC has not carried its burden to prove that Meta 'is currently violating the antitrust laws.'"

The company's reasoning is similar to past arguments it's made about the FTC's case. Meta has said that Instagram and WhatsApp were able to grow to one-billion-user services because of the company's investments. The company also takes issue with the FTC's claim that there is a lack of competition for "personal social networking services." (The FTC has argued that Meta's only competitors for social networking are Snapchat and MeWe, a small privacy-focused social app that runs on decentralized protocols.)

So far, the month-long trial has seen a number of prominent current and former Meta executives take the stand, including CEO Mark Zuckerberg, former COO Sheryl Sandberg and Instagram cofounder Kevin Systrom. Their testimony has revealed new details about the inner workings of the social media company and its tactics to stay ahead of potential competitors.

This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/big-tech/meta-is-trying-to-get-its-antitrust-case-thrown-out-in-the-middle-of-the-trial-204656979.html?src=rss

©

© Chesnot via Getty Images

In the early hours of May 14, xAI's chatbot Grok repeatedly gave X users responses that referred to claims about a "white genocide" in South Africa even if their inquiries had nothing to do about the subject. Now, in a statement posted on the social network, Elon Musk's AI company has explained that "an unauthorized modification" to Grok's prompt on X caused it to "provide a specific response on a political topic." It didn't say what had happened to the personnel involved in rolling out the rogue update. But it added that the modification violated its "internal policies and core values" and that it has conducted a thorough investigation about the incident. 

The website's various users had posted several instances wherein Grok included references to the controversial claims that white South African farmers are facing racial discrimination and land seizures in their country. Their questions? Well, in one tweet, someone asked how many times HBO has changed its streaming service's name. In another, the user asked a baseball player's salary history. In yet another one, someone asked for more information about a WWE match. CNBC was able to replicate the chatbot's responses with white genocide references. When the news website asked if it was specifically programmed to promote "white genocide," Grok said that it wasn't and that its "purpose is to provide factual, helpful, and safe responses based on reason and evidence."

Before xAI issued a response, OpenAI chief Sam Altman posted a snarky response on X. "I’m sure xAI will provide a full and transparent explanation soon," he wrote, and then mimicked Grok's responses by segueing into talking about white genocide. xAI said that from now on, it will be publishing its system prompts on GitHub so that the public can give feedback on every alteration. The company also said that it will put additional checks and measures to ensure xAI employees can't modify Grok's prompt without a review. Whoever edited it recently was able to circumvent its current review process in this case. In addition, the company said it's putting together a team that can monitor incidents related to Grok's answers not caught by automated systems 24/7.

As TechCrunch has noted, this isn't the first time xAI had blamed a contentious Grok behavior to an unauthorized change. Back in February, the chatbot briefly censored sources that talked about how Musk and President Donald Trump are spreading misinformation. xAI co-founder Igor Babuschkin said at the time that a rogue employee had pushed an unapproved modification to Grok's prompt.

This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/ai/grok-kept-talking-about-white-genocide-due-to-an-unauthorized-modification-120044119.html?src=rss

©

© NurPhoto via Getty Images

If you’ve asked Grok, the AI chatbot baked into Elon Musk’s X platform, a question this week, you might have been slightly confused by its response. In what appears to have been some kind of bug that has since been addressed, the AI model was giving responses to users that repeatedly referred to claims about a "white genocide" in South Africa, even when it had nothing to do with the question it was given.

X users have been posting screenshots of various responses they have received from Grok when asking about, for example, HBO’s recent name change, or Toronto Blue Jays pitcher Max Schertzer’s recent earnings, in which the chatbot seems a lot more interested in talking about the contentious nature of claims that white farmers in South Africa are being discriminated against.

When asked by a user how many times HBO has changed its name, Grok followed up its first answer with the following (unrelated) response: "Regarding 'white genocide' in South Africa, some claim it’s real, citing farm attacks and 'Kill the Boer' as evidence. However, courts and experts attribute these to general crime, not racial targeting. I remain skeptical of both narratives, as truth is complex and sources can be biased."

X user Tumi Sole asked Grok why it was suddenly offering its unprompted opinion on the white genocide debate, and its answer appeared to indicate that it had been specifically trained by xAI to answer questions about the topic in a certain way. It added that a glitch had caused it to pull in information about the claims, which have been dismissed by a South African court despite Donald Trump this week granting five white South Amerians refugee status and claiming the Afrikaners arriving in the US were "genocide" victims.

Trump’s view has long been shared by the South African X owner Elon Musk, who accused his home country of having "openly racist ownership laws" that persecute white farmers.

Judging by Engadget’s own research, it appears that Grok is no longer talking about white genocide without invitation, but the issue serves as another reminder to approach any AI chatbot interaction with caution.

This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/ai/grok-gave-x-users-its-opinion-on-white-genocide-in-south-africa-whether-they-liked-it-or-not-151803191.html?src=rss

©

© REUTERS / Reuters

If you're active on Threads, you've probably noticed that posts with links don't do very well with the app's recommendation algorithm. This is especially noticeable if you're a publisher, creator or, yes, a journalist who depends on social media to share your work.

Threads' ambivalence to links isn't an accident. Instagram and Threads boss Adam Mosseri has confirmed that "we don’t place much value" on links, though the company doesn't intentionally downrank them. That may be starting to change, though. As Meta has made winning over creators a bigger priority for Threads, the company is now taking steps to make links a more prominent part of the service.

To start, the app will now allow users to add up to five links to their Threads bios. More importantly, Threads posts with links will now be surfaced more often in the app's recommendations. And Meta is adding link-specific insights to its built-in analytics tool so creators can track how often people are interacting with the content they share. "We want Threads to be a place that helps you grow your reach – even outside of Threads," Meta notes in a blog post.

Meta

While that will be welcome news for anyone hoping to turn their Threads account into a reliable traffic source, it's unclear just how dramatic of a shift users should expect. The app's algorithm is still a black box, even for power users. And Threads' emphasis on recommended posts means that even users with large numbers of followers tend to get more interactions from non-followers.

Publishers have also reported mixed results when it comes to Threads. Last year, several publishers reported that Bluesky, despite being far smaller than Threads or X, was a far more reliable traffic source than its larger counterparts. More recently though, some publishers have reported spikes in referral traffic from Threads following the company's reversal of a policy to not recommend political content. On the other hand, Meta's past is filled with numerous examples of why publishers and creators shouldn't rely too heavily on the social network. Still, it may be a good time to at least start experimenting with more links on Threads.

This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/social-media/threads-is-finally-embracing-links-150012499.html?src=rss

©

© Meta

There's about to be a new online movie rental site in town. Letterboxd is introducing a transactional video-on-demand service for its users, according to The Hollywood Reporter. The social media platform for movie lovers announced the news during the Cannes Film Festival. 

The Letterboxd Video Store will have curated rental categories such as up-and-coming filmmakers, under-appreciated movies and more on demand. There will also be areas that highlight the movies premiering at different film festivals, many of which will be available for a set amount of time. Plus, the rental service could offer some movies that only have a limited distribution, getting them in front of a wider audience. 

Letterboxd pitches its Video Store it as a natural next step for the company. “Every day, we see members recommending films to each other, adding to their watchlists and hungry to discover more,” Letterboxd CEO Matthew Buchanan stated. “Letterboxd Video Store is our way of delivering for those film lovers, creating a dedicated space for films that deserve an audience.”  

However, while we know it should be coming, that's about all the logistical information we have. Letterboxd has yet to release pricing, launch dates or countries where rentals will be available. These finer points should all arrive in the upcoming months. 

This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/entertainment/tv-movies/letterboxd-will-launch-a-curated-online-rental-service-for-films-145056220.html?src=rss

©

© Letterboxd

Threads will finally start giving users more visibility into when their accounts are penalized for breaking its rules. Meta is bringing its “Account Status” feature to Threads, which will enable people to see when the company has removed or demoted posts or handed out other penalties.

The change adds a layer of much-needed transparency to Threads, which already has a recommendation algorithm that can be hard for creators to understand. Earlier this year, Meta reversed course on whether it would recommend political content to Threads users after it tried to limit posts about elections and other “social” topics last year.

As on Instagram (and Facebook), Account Status allows Threads users to view “actions” Meta has taken against their account. It will indicate if a post has been removed, made less visible in other users’ feeds or deemed un-recommendable by Meta. It will also show if a user has been blocked from using certain features for breaking the platform’s rules.

If Meta has “actioned” your account for some reason, Account Status is also where you can request an appeal. The company says it will alert users once their report has been reviewed.

Account Status is starting to roll out now and is accessible from the “account” section in Threads’ settings menu.

This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/social-media/threads-will-start-telling-users-when-their-posts-are-demoted-204628224.html?src=rss

©

© Meta

Instagram's Threads app began testing advertisements for its users at the start of this year, and the social platform is already ramping up its monetization efforts. Meta announced at IAB NewFronts that it will start testing video ads on Threads. The company didn't get specific about the size or scale of this preliminary test, but said that a "small number" of advertisers will trial 19:9 or 1:1 video ad creatives placed between typical posts in users' feeds.

At the NewFronts event, where social media companies can pitch themselves to advertisers, Meta also said that it is trying out a new ad option centered around Instagram Reels. It is developing Reels trending ads that will be shown next to some of the service's most popular videos.

Basically, Meta is following the same trajectory with its Instagram networks that it did with Facebook: making it less and less enjoyable to actually socialize with your connections.

This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/social-media/meta-will-test-video-ads-on-threads-192213050.html?src=rss

©

© FABRICE COFFRINI via Getty Images

So a professional dominatrix specializing in foot worship signs into her YouTube account for the first time in seventeen years and compiles over 900 playlists, including the debut LP of progressive math-rock band 90 Day Men, an album from hyperpop/chiptune darling Saoirse Dream and portions of the original soundtrack from early 2000s anime Chobits. There's no punchline to that one. Let me explain.

Despite an entirely separate paid product — YouTube Music — vanilla YouTube's sometimes spotty enforcement of copyright has made it a goldmine for music, especially the kind that's niche, and possibly unavailable on legal streamers. Dedicated channels for screamo, doom metal or acid jazz, for instance, are regularly uploading rare releases, and searching for nearly any artist and "full album" will typically return the desired result no matter how obscure. In some cases, albums are uploaded as a single, lengthy video with timestamps indicating where one track ends and the next begins; in others, individual tracks are uploaded and compiled as playlists.

In recent months, however, countless tainted playlists have cropped up in YouTube search results. Engadget compiled a sample of 100 channels (there are undoubtedly many, many more) engaged in what we'll refer to as playlist stuffing. These had between 30 and 1,987 playlists each — 58,191 in total. The overwhelming majority of these stuffed playlists contain an irrelevant, nearly hour-long video simply titled "More."

Engadget

The robotic narration of "More" begins: "Cryptocurrency investing, when approached with a long-term perspective, can be a powerful way to build wealth." You'd be forgiven for assuming its aim is to direct unwitting listeners to a shitcoin pump-and-dump. But over the next 57 minutes and 55 seconds, it meanders incoherently between a variety of topics like affiliate marketing, making a website and search engine optimization. (Here's the entire transcript if you find yourself pathologically curious.) What's odd is there's no link to any scam page, no specific business the video directs a listener to patronize. Its description simply reads "Other stuff I've recorded and edited that I hadn't released until now, a special for my biggest fans with footage never seen before!"

For all its supposed advice on making easy money online, its best example isn't anything said in the video, it's that "More" has amassed nearly 7.5 million views at the time of this writing — and it's monetized.

It's far from the only video of its kind. Many longer albums, like Mal Blum's You Look A Lot Like Me, Titus Andronicus's The Most Lamentable Tragedy and Slugdge's The Cosmic Cornucopia are appear as stuffed playlists with "More," "Unreleased" and "Full Album." Both are similar marketing slop; they have 3.7 and 3.5 million views, respectively.

Unscrupulous artists also seem to engage, on a smaller scale, in a less obtuse sort of playlist stuffing. The channel Ultra Sounds has garnered 4.1 million views on its song "The Pause," after inserting it into — among other places — the Nine Inch Nails album Add Violence. Anastasia Coope's Darning Woman and 1991, an album by shoegaze pioneers Drop Nineteens, are not made better for the inclusion of Murat Başkaya, an apparent Turkish rapper. Electronic dance group The Daring Ones have added a few hundred thousand views to several of their tracks by stuffing them into a variety of playlists, including one of last month's new Viagra Boys record. Engadget attempted to contact these musicians on their content strategy but has not heard back.

"More" takes advantage of a very simple UI quirk. Besides there being no easy way to tell how many playlists a YouTube account has made (it loads them 30 at a time on scroll), search results show only the first two tracks of a given playlist. "More" is almost invariably inserted as track three. Unwitting listeners who click and tab away are greeted with irrelevant marketing jargon around seven minutes later — a scenario reflected in the often bewildered comments beneath the video.

Playlist stuffing would seem to contravene YouTube's policies on playlists and deceptive practices, which proscribe "playlists with titles or descriptions that mislead viewers into thinking they’re about to view videos different than what the playlist contains." A glance at the channel to which "More" was uploaded provides a hint that something more insidious is at play than just playlist stuffing for ad revenue.

"More" is not the only video on the channel Hangmeas. The channel description states "I produce my own custom music videos with footage I record around East Asia where me and the locals sing and dance to traditional music from their cultures," and sure enough its other two uploads are songs from Cambodian musicians — uploaded 18 years ago. The army of channels posting stuffed playlists containing "More" are all similarly ancient. One, kcnmttcnn, was created on December 26, 2005, only a few months after YouTube itself first launched. It now hosts over 900 playlists. The vast majority of channels engaged in this activity were created in 2006, and the youngest was claimed in February of 2009. In all likelihood, these accounts were abandoned long ago and have since been compromised, either by whoever is behind "More" or by a third party which sold access to these accounts to them.

Just like Hangmeas, several of these possibly compromised accounts have their channel descriptions, links — like the Myspace account for the aforementioned dominatrix — and old uploads intact. Viewing them in aggregate triggers a strange kind of melancholy, like finding the photo album of someone else's family in a thrift store. Here's two friends go-karting down a stretch of farmland; here's a girl sledding down a very short hill; here's 11 minutes off an online game of Uno; here's two girls trying on hats in a department store; here's Muse playing "Time Is Running Out" in Paris, 2006, rendered in such poor quality it could be literally any show at all. This one's just called "David." Its description reads "I'm cool."

Unfortunately none of these channels had extant contact information. It's impossible to know how the subjects of these videos feel about their old digital selves being leveraged for playlist stuffing. We can't even know how many of these people are still alive.

Somehow, a raft of accounts old enough to vote logged back in, probably from very different parts of the world than where they originated, and churned out playlists at a rate no human being could possibly hope to achieve. YouTube, it seems, did not find this suspicious. We reached out to YouTube for comment and did not receive comment by time of publication.

Yes, amateurish, nearly two decade-old footage harkens to a simpler time, when being able to upload a video that the whole world could see — though much more likely it would be viewed by a couple of your friends, and then one reporter 18 years later — was still exciting. But the history of the internet seems to be contained here: The simple joy of connection, neglected on a megacorp's servers, slowly co-opted by anyone trying to make a quick and dishonest buck.

Author's note: I've included a list of the potentially compromised accounts here; if you happen to be the owner of one of them, I'd love to hear from you.

This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/entertainment/youtube/the-enshitification-of-youtubes-full-album-playlists-172934629.html?src=rss

©

©

Meta is facing its biggest existential threat in its history. Years after the Federal Trade Commission first sued the social network in an attempt to unwind its acquisitions of Instagram and WhatsApp, the trial that will shape its future is finally underway. FTC v. Meta began last month when CEO Mark Zuckerberg took the stand, and is expected to last for several weeks.

The FTC is hoping to prove to US District judge James Boasberg that Meta’s acquisitions of its one-time rivals were anticompetitive and hurt US consumers. Meta, meanwhile, has argued that Instagram and WhatsApp were only able to grow to the billion-user services they are because of its investment into them over the last decade or more.

While the case is unlikely to be fully settled anytime soon, the trial has successfully uncovered tons of new details about the inner workings of Meta and its approach to potential competitors. And testimony from former execs like Instagram cofounder Kevin Systrom and longtime COO Sheryl Sandberg have shed new light on the company’s past.

Instagram’s former CEO speaks

Facebook’s 2012 acquisition of Instagram is a central part of the FTC’s case against Meta. The government has argued that Mark Zuckerberg bought Instagram in order to neutralize it as a competitor and is trying to force Meta to divest it. So it was more than a little eyebrow raising when Instagram’s cofounder and former CEO Kevin Systrom took the stand and didn’t exactly come to Meta’s defense.

While Zuckerberg had testified that Meta had helped Instagram grow, Systrom testified that Zuckerberg saw Instagram as a “threat” to Facebook’s growth and intentionally withheld company resources as a result. “As the founder of Facebook, he felt a lot of emotion around which one was better, meaning Instagram or Facebook," Systrom said.

Sheryl Sandberg thought Zuckerberg overpaid for Instagram

Facebook’s decision to pay $1 billion for Instagram — an app that had no revenue and just a handful of employees — seemed like an incredible sum to many onlookers at the time. Among them, though, was Zuckerberg’s former top lieutenant. The trial unearthed an exchange between the two from 2012 in which Zuckerberg asked if $1 billion was too much to pay. She replied that “yes, of course it’s way too much.”

On the stand, however, Sandberg said that she had been wrong. “I don’t think anyone today would say we paid too much for Instagram,” she said, in testimony reported by Bloomberg.

Zuckerberg knew the company could face a breakup

In one notable email exchange, Zuckerberg speculated that the company could one day face antitrust action that would force the company to divest Instagram. "I'm beginning to wonder whether spinning Instagram out is the only structure that will accomplish a number of important goals," Zuckerberg mused in a 2018 email. "As calls to break up the big tech companies grow, there is a non-trivial chance that we will be forced to spin out Instagram and perhaps WhatsApp in the next 5-10 years anyway."

Zuckerberg considered nuking friend lists to boost engagement

In 2022, facing rising competition from TikTok, Zuckerberg apparently was growing concerned that Facebook’s “cultural relevance is decreasing quickly.” To address this, he suggested deleting users’ friends lists as often as once a year in an effort to get people to “start again.” Bizarrely, he referred to this plan as “double down on friending,” as Business Insider noted.

Zuckerberg, apparently aware that the plan was somewhat risky, even suggested that Facebook could test out the idea in a “smaller country” first in order to gauge the effect it might have on users. However, Tom Alison, who oversees the Facebook app for Meta, quickly shot him down, according to The Verge, telling Zuckerberg the plan was not “viable.”

When asked about it directly on the stand, Zuckerberg simply stated that “we never did that.” Still, the fact that he even considered such a drastic move is telling. Zuckerberg floated the idea in 2022, at a time when TikTok’s popularity among US teens was surging and Meta was becoming increasingly alarmed at TikTok’s dominance. In the same email, Zuckerberg also questioned Alison about whether Facebook could move to a “follow model.”

Just how threatened they were by TikTok

Zuckerberg has previously talked about how Meta was “slow” to recognize the threat posed by TikTok. But the FTC trial has unearthed new details about Meta’s response to the app’s rise. In her testimony, Sandberg said that Meta was already feeling pressure from TikTok in 2018. By 2020, the company had invested more than $500 million into building its competitor, Reels, according to an internal email noted by The New York Times. That effort saw the company hire more than 1,000 new employees to bolster the company’s video efforts.

Zuckerberg also touched on TikTok, saying that the app quickly became a “highly urgent” threat to Meta. “We observed that our growth slowed down dramatically,” Zuckerberg said, referring to TikTok’s rise. That may sound surprisingly candid for Zuckerberg, but his remarks were also strategic for Meta’s defense. The company has argued that TikTok is an even bigger threat to its business than Instagram or WhatsApp ever was, and has slammed the government for claiming that TikTok isn’t a direct rival.

Europeans aren’t buying Meta’s ad-free subscriptions

As the European Union has adopted stricter tech regulations over the last few years, the new laws have forced tech giants to change their products in sometimes meaningful ways. For Meta, one such change has been the addition of ad-free versions of Facebook and Instagram that are only available via subscription in the EU. The company began offering it in 2023 and has slashed the price of it more recently following legal scrutiny.

But even with a price cut, it seems ad-free subscriptions to Facebook and Instagram are unpopular. On the stand, Meta’s Chief Revenue Officer John Hegeman testified that there has been “very little interest” in the plan with only “about .007 percent” of users opting in, according to testimony reported by The Verge.

Threads almost didn’t get its own app

Meta’s X competitor was almost relegated to a feature within Instagram. That’s according to Instagram and Threads chief Adam Mosseri who testified (per The Verge) that Meta’s original plan was for Threads to live inside Instagram itself. However, it ended up being too “confusing” so they ultimately opted to break it out into its own service. Mosseri said the move was “contentious” at the time.

Now though, it’s hard to argue that Meta didn’t make the right call. Threads has passed 350 million users and Zuckerberg has predicted it will be the company’s next billion-person app. It’s nearly impossible to imagine Threads reaching that level of success if it was merely yet another Instagram feature.

Update, May 8, 2025, 12:15PM PT: This story has been updated to reflect testimony from Instagram's Adam Mosseri. 

This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/big-tech/what-weve-learned-from-ftc-v-meta-antitrust-trial-162048138.html?src=rss

©

© DREW ANGERER via Getty Images

A group of researchers covertly ran a months-long "unauthorized" experiment in one of Reddit’s most popular communities using AI-generated comments to test the persuasiveness of large language models. The experiment, which was revealed over the weekend by moderators of r/changemyview, is described by Reddit mods as “psychological manipulation” of unsuspecting users.

“The CMV Mod Team needs to inform the CMV community about an unauthorized experiment conducted by researchers from the University of Zurich on CMV users,” the subreddit’s moderators wrote in a lengthy post notifying Redditors about the research. “This experiment deployed AI-generated comments to study how AI could be used to change views.”

The researchers used LLMs to create comments in response to posts on r/changemyview, a subreddit where Reddit users post (often controversial or provocative) opinions and request debate from other users. The community has 3.8 million members and often ends up on the front page of Reddit. According to the subreddit’s moderators, the AI took on numerous different identities in comments during the course of the experiment, including a sexual assault survivor, a trauma counselor “specializing in abuse,” and a “Black man opposed to Black Lives Matter.” Many of the original comments have since been deleted, but some can still be viewed in an archive created by 404 Media.

In a draft of their paper, the unnamed researchers describe how they not only used AI to generate responses, but attempted to personalize its replies based on information gleaned from the original poster’s prior Reddit history. “In addition to the post’s content, LLMs were provided with personal attributes of the OP (gender, age, ethnicity, location, and political orientation), as inferred from their posting history using another LLM,” they write.

The r/chnagemyview moderators note that the researchers’ violated multiple subreddit rules, including a policy requiring the disclosure when AI is used to generate comment and a rule prohibiting bots. They say they filed an official complaint with the University of Zurich and have requested the researchers withhold publication of their paper.

Reddit also appears to be considering some kind of legal action. Chief Legal Officer Ben Lee responded to the controversy on Monday, writing that the researchers' actions were "deeply wrong on both a moral and legal level" and a violation of Reddit's site-wide rules.

We have banned all accounts associated with the University of Zurich research effort. Additionally, while we were able to detect many of these fake accounts, we will continue to strengthen our inauthentic content detection capabilities, and we have been in touch with the moderation team to ensure we’ve removed any AI-generated content associated with this research.

We are in the process of reaching out to the University of Zurich and this particular research team with formal legal demands. We want to do everything we can to support the community and ensure that the researchers are held accountable for their misdeeds here.

In an email, the University of Zurich researchers directed Engadget to the university's media relations department, which didn't immediately respond to questions. In posts on Reddit and in a draft of their paper, the researchers said their research had been approved by a university ethics committee and that their work could help online communities like Reddit protect users from more “malicious” uses of AI. 

“We acknowledge the moderators’ position that this study was an unwelcome intrusion in your community, and we understand that some of you may feel uncomfortable that this experiment was conducted without prior consent,” the researchers wrote in a comment responding to the r/changemyview mods. “We believe the potential benefits of this research substantially outweigh its risks. Our controlled, low-risk study provided valuable insight into the real-world persuasive capabilities of LLMs—capabilities that are already easily accessible to anyone and that malicious actors could already exploit at scale for far more dangerous reasons (e.g., manipulating elections or inciting hateful speech).”

The mods for r/changemyview dispute that the research was necessary or novel, noting that OpenAI researchers have conducted experiments using data from r/changemyview “without experimenting on non-consenting human subjects.” 

“People do not come here to discuss their views with AI or to be experimented upon,” the moderators wrote. “People who visit our sub deserve a space free from this type of intrusion.”

Update, April 28, 2025, 3:45PM PT: This post was updated to add details from a statement by Reddit's Chief Legal Officer.

This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/ai/researchers-secretly-experimented-on-reddit-users-with-ai-generated-comments-194328026.html?src=rss

©

© SOPA Images via Getty Images

If you’ve performed a Google search lately, you’ve undoubtedly come across an AI Overview in your search results. This tool, powered by Google’s Gemini, tries to save you some clicks by aggregating information from the links populated in your search results and succinctly delivering what it believes to be the information you’re looking for. The accuracy of these overviews, however, often leaves a lot to be desired, and the tool has been plagued with hallucinations since its launch (with varying degrees of hilarity).

Now Google is bringing the tool to YouTube, testing a video version of AI overviews for a small number of YouTube Premium members in the US across limited English search queries. While Google search results show LLM-generated text summaries, YouTube’s AI overviews will function as something of a highlight reel for certain videos.

In a post on YouTube Community forums, Google said that, "This new feature will use AI to highlight clips from videos that will be most helpful for your search query…This is most likely to show when you search for more information about products you’re shopping for (such as 'best noise cancelling headphones'), or when you search for more information about locations or things to do in those locations (such as 'museums to visit in San Francisco')."

This raises some questions about the revenue model for creators on YouTube and how AI-generated clip reels would affect their incomes. A major concern with AI overview in search is Google’s own summary absorbing traffic that would otherwise have gone to the publications shown in the search results. Bringing these tools to YouTube is likely to raise the same concerns for video content creators.

Google will be collecting feedback on these overviews from Premium members, who can vote with a thumbs up or thumbs down on the AI-generated highlight clips. Google hasn’t said how long this pilot will run for, or whether Google intends to expand YouTube’s AI overview to anyone beyond Premium subscribers.

This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/ai/youtube-is-testing-its-own-version-of-ai-overviews-145353147.html?src=rss

©

© ASSOCIATED PRESS

Meta is finally acknowledging that Facebook’s feed is filled with too many spammy posts. In an update, the company says it plans to start “cracking down” on some of the worst offenders. “Facebook Feed doesn’t always serve up fresh, engaging posts that you consistently enjoy,” the company writes. “We’re working on it.”

Specifically, Meta says it will lower the reach of creators that share posts with "long, distracting captions” as well as posts with captions that are irrelevant or unrelated to the shared content. These accounts will also no longer be eligible for monetization. Likewise, the company says it’s taking “more aggressive” steps to combat “spam networks that coordinate fake engagement.” This includes making comments from these accounts less visible, and removing Facebook pages meant to “inflate reach.” Meta is also testing a feature that allows users to anonymously downvote comments in order to flag them as not “useful.”

The update comes as Meta is trying to revamp Facebook to make it more appealing to “young adults.” The company recently brought back a tab for friends content, in an update Mark Zuckerberg described as making the platform more like “OG Facebook.” Notably though, Meta’s update doesn’t mention one of the more persistent forms of engagement bait that’s emerged on Facebook over the last year: AI slop.

The phenomenon, which has been extensively documented by 404 Media, involved bizarre, often nonsensical AI-generated images — like the now infamous “Shrimp Jesus” — that serve little purpose other than to farm engagement for people trying to make money on or off Facebook. These spammers are often aided by Facebook’s own algorithm, which boosts the posts, researchers have found.

AI slop and engagement bait aren’t the only types of low-quality posts that have overwhelmed users’ Facebook feeds in recent years. I regularly see posts from pages that seem to do nothing but screenshot old Reddit posts from r/AITA, or recycle old news about celebrities I don’t follow or particularly care about. Meta’s reports on the most widely-viewed content on its platform regularly feature anodyne posts that are engineered to rack up millions of comments, like those that ask users to comment “amen” or solve basic math equations. Posts like that may not fit neatly into Meta’s latest crackdown, though it’s unlikely many Facebook users are actually enjoying this content.

The company does note it’s also trying to “elevate” the creators that are actually sharing original content, including by cracking down on accounts that steal their work. But given how much easier it is to make AI slop than good original content, it could be a long time before Meta is able to get Facebook’s spam problem under control.

This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/social-media/meta-finally-acknowledges-that-facebook-has-a-major-spam-problem-175304372.html?src=rss

©

© NurPhoto via Getty Images

For those of us who've been on the internet for decades, today is a big milestone: the 20th anniversary of the first video uploaded to YouTube. That happened way back on April 23, 2005, only about a year and a half before Google made the shrewd move of purchasing the site. That first video is the all-time classic 19-second clip "Me at the zoo," the kind of video that came to define early YouTube. It's grainy, short and has no production values to speak of. Fast forward a few decades and YouTube has no peer in terms of its sheer volume of audiovisual content —the company says that a mind-boggling 20 billion videos) have been uploaded in the last 20 years, and 20 million are updated daily.

With all that in mind, Engadget's staff put their heads together to pick out the videos that have meant the most to them over the years. Not surprisingly, there's some weird stuff here, a lot of it from the early days of the platform. Apparently the stuff that really resonates with us isn't polish or production, but the raw, oddball stuff that couldn't have existed anywhere else. 

Ambient Renders

I test a whole bunch of portable batteries for Engadget. A power bank can refill a dead smartphone in one to two hours, but thanks to annoying technology “advancements” it takes around 20 hours to drain a phone again. I’m constantly playing YouTube videos on my tester handsets with the screen brightness cranked all the way up to make them die faster (these poor phones). My favorite videos to use are from Ambient Renders. Each one is eight or so hours of painstakingly rendered, mostly nighttime views from the windows of fancy lofts in modern-day big cities, cozy bedrooms of the distant past and sci-fi futurescapes. The soundtracks are soft rain, lonesome wind, crackling fires, distant thunder and the rumble of passing transport pods.

I often return to a Warm Cozy Cabin With a Relaxing Fire and Gentle Wind — a candle-lit bedroom with huge windows overlooking snow-covered pines, with a couple of mugs steaming in the corner. The subtle movements and details really come to life when you play them on a TV. There are a ton of these types of videos on YouTube and, lately, the creator has taken to adding “not made with AI” disclaimers to the video descriptions. It’s plain to see these are made with love and skill. The intricacy is stunning and even the sci-fi views are anchored in realism. — Amy Skorheim, senior reporter

Canadian, Please | gunnarolla & Julia Bentley

I was trying to remember the first YouTube video I was obsessed with and honestly couldn't tell you. Between communitychannel, Jake and Amir, Michelle Phan, Wong Fu Productions and many more, I have too many likes and faves to count. But I can tell you that I've been jamming to Gunnorolla's "Canadian, Please" since before it became cool to want to be Canadian. This certified bop was something I replayed over and over; I've memorized the lyrics and the song haunts me in my dreams, too. My more modern favorites change every month, but I currently adore CinemaSins, Scary Interesting, Wilko Rehashed, Psychology in Seattle and The School of Life. Oh and also, don't go looking for my channel from when I was a regular vlogger in the 2000s. Don't. — Cherlynn Low, managing editor

Carl Lewis National Anthem Fail

YouTube isn’t just for watching new videos of celebrities embarrassing themselves. You can also revisit humiliations from way before the video site’s inception!

Take this spectacular(ly bad) national anthem performance by Olympic sprinter Carl Lewis. Ahead of a 1993 regular-season NBA matchup between the Chicago Bulls and New Jersey Nets, the gold medalist stepped on the court to demonstrate the vocal talent we were deprived of as he wasted his prime years racing.

This video only includes snippets of Lewis’ belting (as in whipping listeners with a belt) rendition. But you still get his overly embellished opening note, self-aware “Uh oh!” after making a sound you’d expect from an animal being stepped on and an (ultimately unfulfilled) promise to make up for it.

As a bonus, this version includes SportsCenter anchor Charlie Steiner’s inability to keep his composure after the clip rolls. That’s followed by his Dad Joke-worthy commentary that Francis Scott Off-Key wrote Lewis’ rendition. — Will Shanklin, contributing reporter

Dog of Wisdom

It's almost 10 years later and I still reference this video every couple weeks. I can't offer higher praise than that. — Anna Washenko, contributing reporter

Food Wishes

One of the great things about YouTube, to this day, is the massive number of tutorial videos. I’ve used it to learn how to tie a tie, record music, put together furniture and where to dispose of that furniture when it’s given up the ghost. It also taught me how to cook. This is primarily thanks to one man. He goes by Chef John, but his channel is called Food Wishes. 

I’m fairly sure he’s the very first cook to capitalize on the platform, as he’s been making recipe videos pretty much since the beginning. This spaghetti with clam sauce tutorial is over 18 years old. I chose this particular video because I remember a trio of occasions in my life where I whipped out this recipe to amaze friends, family and (gasp) would-be romantic partners. His simple, charming and no-nonsense approach to cooking has always clicked with me, and I’m not alone. He has over four million followers on the platform and still cranks out videos to this day. His channel is a great reminder of how useful YouTube can actually be. — Lawrence Bonk, contributing reporter

John Frusciante - 09 - New Dawn Fades

My favorite YouTube video, the one I return to year after year, is a bootleg of the Red Hot Chili Pepper’s John Frusciante playing Joy Division’s “New Dawn Fades” at a solo show in Amsterdam at the start of the century. Say what you will about his main band, but John Frusciante is easily one of the greatest living guitarists, and this video — shot in 2001 and uploaded to YouTube less than a year after the platform went online in 2005 — is the perfect showcase of his many talents as a musician.

The footage is grainy, like so many videos from the era, but what counts is you can hear nearly every nuance of his performance. With his beloved Martin 00-15 acoustic guitar, Frusciante plays two melodies at the same time in his trademark syncopated style, all the while singing Ian Curtis’ lyrics with so much emotion.

As a teenager, Frusciante’s performance inspired me to no end. I spent countless summer hours trying to learn and emulate his playing style. In 2006, I even bought an issue of Guitar World magazine because it came with a DVD that included an interview with Frusciante and a lesson from the man himself on how to play "Under the Bridge". I probably should have known someone would upload that video to YouTube. It would have saved me a few bucks.

Looking back at my favorite video all these years later, it captures what’s best about YouTube. You can find nearly every performance in music recording history. Frusciante’s performance of "New Dawn Fades" could have easily disappeared with the passage of time. Instead, it will now exist as long as YouTube does, waiting to inspire someone else. — Igor Bonifacic, senior reporter

Lenny Kravitz - Fly Away (lyrics)

YouTube is home to an endless stream of poignant art, thought-provoking video essays and open windows to other people’s lives. More than that, though, it’s home to a lot of really dumb shit. Most of that shit is bad, as forgettable as it is lazy. But when someone puts in the work to make their dumb idea as dumb as possible, when they are enlightened by just how dumb their idea could be... that’s when the magic happens.

This Lenny Kravitz “remix” by all-around web artist Neil Cicierega — which turns the funk rock hit into an ode to dragonflies and having sex with candy bars, all while aping a “my first Windows XP slideshow” aesthetic — is a prime example of the “good dumb” I’m talking about. It is completely of the internet, something that could only result from one weirdo out there with a silly idea and some video editing software. It is so stupid, but also inspired, so it always works for me. — Jeff Dunn, senior reporter

Rancid Stool - Low Music video

Damn, who is that handsome young man having the worst day of his life in glorious 280p? Oh wait, that would be me.

Way back in the day, my buds and I made a music video for a Foo Fighters song for a contest. Needless to say, we didn't win, but we had an absolute blast all the same. Making something silly with your friends is really fun. Who could have imagined?

Some [mumbles] years later, the video is still one of my favorite things I've ever done. Yes, the editing stinks (my bad), it doesn't make a whole lot of sense narratively and the name of our would-be production company is very regrettable.

Still, I'm really proud of what we put together. Every time I watch it, I get the urge to start making fun videos again. Maybe I’ll actually do that someday.

P.S. Screw you and your magnificent mustache forever, Chad Sexington. —Kris Holt, contributing reporter

Shining Movie Trailer Parody

In the age of AI, fake movie trailers have become something of a spam epidemic on YouTube. But as someone who distinctly remembers swapping video files to friends and coworkers via email with Quicktime or AVI files attached — yes, it was exactly the bandwidth and security nightmare it sounds like — I still rank this hand-edited Shining remix near the top of my YouTube Mount Rushmore. The romcom take on Kubrick's horror classic dates back to at least 2005, but it seems to get rediscovered by new fans every few years, and rightly so — it's a gem. — John Falcone, executive editor

Star Trek: Tik Tok

Lots of people have made music videos out of unexpected crossovers like this, but Star Trek: Tik Tok still stands out to me as the best. Every clip from the original 1960s series is paired to perfection with the lyrics, and Captain Kirk is a weirdly fitting analogue for Kesha's late 2000s party girl.

When I watch it now, I think this video captures the scrappy ethos of what it meant to go viral during the early days of YouTube. It was about creativity, not content creators. People were making weird and funny shit just for the heck of it. Every now and then you'd stumble on a video that resonated and it lived in your head rent-free for years. And what can I say, I still think this track is a banger. — A.W.

We Like The Moon

The first YouTube video I saw that left me totally agog at what the human mind is capable of was "We Like the Moon." I didn’t have a TV at the time so had no idea Quiznos had used the concept in their commercials. When I saw it on my friend's computer in 2006 or so, I was coming at it fresh. I remember a giddiness rising in my soul and a goofy smile plastering my face. It felt like we were living in a world of limitless creativity and possibility where fun was a guiding principle and “good” didn’t mean access to funding, expensive equipment, technical prowess, or even a decent voice. My partner and I sang it, and still sing it, whenever the moon, marmots, chopsticks or zeppelins are mentioned. Now, I realize strangely proportioned, animal-like monstrosities raving off-key about nonsense is old hat at this point. But I will never forget when this was first played for me. — A.S.

Where the Hell is Matt? 2008

This is the third of Matt Harding's videos of himself dancing badly in various scenic locations around the world, and the first in which he encouraged bystanders to dance with him — equally badly, with some exceptions. I have no defenses against large groups of people doing the same thing simultaneously in multiple locations.

Oddly specific, I know, but in a society obsessed with dividing and categorizing, it reminds me of our common humanity. This video never fails to bring a tear to my eye, from the subtle political statements (Tel Aviv and East Jerusalem were not placed right next to each other by accident) to the sheer obvious joy of everybody involved. I even like the music. — Sam Rutherford, senior reporter

Correction, April 23, 2025, 3:39PM ET: This story originally said that 20 trillion videos have been uploaded to YouTube; the correct figure is 20 billon. We apologize for the error.

This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/entertainment/youtube/engadgets-favorite-videos-from-20-years-of-youtube-162004518.html?src=rss

©

© jawed

More people worldwide will be seeing ads on Threads in the future. Back in January, Meta launched a small test of ads visible to a subset of users in the US and Japan, which included a handful of brands. Threads was completely ad-free since it became available a year-and-a-half before that, though Meta had been planning to put ads on the service months before the test began. Now, Meta is rolling out ads on Threads to over 30 countries globally. That means the advertisements will reach a bigger percentage of its 300 million users, though it will be interesting to see if their rollout will have any impact on the service's steady growth. 

Meta didn't list out those 30 countries, and it also didn't say how often ads will show up in people's feeds. Like in the initial test period though, the advertisements will appear in between organic content or posts from people and friends users follow. Meta is opening up ads on Threads to all its eligible advertisers around the world, as well, so users will be seeing placements from more companies, including ones local to their countries. The company told us that it's adopting a phased approach to its rollout, so advertisements might appear more and more frequently on the service as time goes on. 

This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/big-tech/meta-expands-ads-to-threads-users-in-over-30-countries-150535654.html?src=rss

©

© Meta

Facebook acquired Instagram in 2012 for $1 billion, but tensions between Mark Zuckerberg and the app’s founders persisted for years afterward. On Tuesday, Instagram’s former CEO and cofounder Kevin Systrom took the stand in Meta’s antitrust trial in Washington, D.C. and offered a firsthand account of how Zuckerberg viewed the photo-sharing app as a “threat” to Facebook.

Systrom, who ran Instagram until 2018, said that Zuckerberg slowed hiring and other investments into Instagram despite its success. Zuckerberg, Systrom testified, "believed we were a threat to their growth," and as a result "was not investing" in the photo-sharing app, according to testimony reported by The New York Times. As The Times notes, Instagram had only a fraction of the employees as Facebook even after reaching 1 billion users. "As the founder of Facebook, he felt a lot of emotion around which one was better, meaning Instagram or Facebook," Systrom reportedly said. 

Tensions between Instagram’s founders and Zuckerberg over company resources have been previously reported, but Systrom’s testimony is the first time he’s publicly spoken in detail about the issues that ultimately led him to resign from the company. On the stand Tuesday, Systrom said that Zuckerberg “believed we were hurting Facebook’s growth,” according to Bloomberg.

Facebook’s acquisition of Instagram is central to the FTC’s case against Meta. The government has argued that Meta’s purchase of WhatsApp and Instagram were anticompetitive and that the social media company should be forced to divest the businesses. Systrom’s testimony comes a week after Zuckerberg took the stand and defended Meta’s $1 billion Instagram acquisition. However, a 2018 email from Zuckerberg that surfaced earlier in the trial showed that the Facebook founder was aware as early as 2018 that he could be forced to spin off the services into independent entities.

This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/social-media/instagrams-former-ceo-testifies-zuckerberg-thought-the-app-was-a-threat-to-facebook-202112282.html?src=rss

©

© NurPhoto via Getty Images