Science on YouTube: What users find when they search for climate science and climate manipulation
📝 Abstract
Online video-sharing sites such as YouTube are very popular and also used by a lot of people to obtain knowledge and information, also on science, health and technology. Technically they could be valuable tools for the public communication of science and technology, but the users of YouTube are also confronted with conspiracy theories and erroneous and misleading information that deviates from scientific consensus views. This contribution details the results of a study that investigates what kind of information users find when they are searching for climate science and climate manipulation topics on YouTube and whether this information corresponds with or challenges scientific consensus views. An innovative methodological approach using the anonymization network Tor is introduced for drawing randomized samples of YouTube videos. This approach was used to select and examine a sample of 140 YouTube videos on climate topics.
💡 Analysis
Online video-sharing sites such as YouTube are very popular and also used by a lot of people to obtain knowledge and information, also on science, health and technology. Technically they could be valuable tools for the public communication of science and technology, but the users of YouTube are also confronted with conspiracy theories and erroneous and misleading information that deviates from scientific consensus views. This contribution details the results of a study that investigates what kind of information users find when they are searching for climate science and climate manipulation topics on YouTube and whether this information corresponds with or challenges scientific consensus views. An innovative methodological approach using the anonymization network Tor is introduced for drawing randomized samples of YouTube videos. This approach was used to select and examine a sample of 140 YouTube videos on climate topics.
📄 Content
Science on YouTube: What users find when they search for climate science and climate manipulation
Joachim Allgaier Institute of Science, Technology and Society Studies Alpen-Adria-Universität Klagenfurt Sterneckstraße 15 9010 Klagenfurt, Austria Phone: +43/463/2700-6157 E-Mail: joachim.allgaier@aau.at
ABSTRACT Online video-sharing sites such as YouTube are very popular and also used by a lot of people to obtain knowledge and information, also on science, health and technology. Technically they could be valuable tools for the public communication of science and technology, but the users of YouTube are also confronted with conspiracy theories and erroneous and misleading information that deviates from scientific consensus views. This contribution details the results of a study that investigates what kind of information users find when they are searching for climate science and climate manipulation topics on YouTube and whether this information corresponds with or challenges scientific consensus views. An innovative methodological approach using the anonymization network Tor is introduced for drawing randomized samples of YouTube videos. This approach was used to select and examine a sample of 140 YouTube videos on climate topics. Keywords YouTube, Video, Science Communication, Tor, Climate, Climate Change, Climate Science, Climate Engineering, Geoengineering
- INTRODUCTION The online video-sharing website YouTube has been a phenomenal success and growing rapidly since its launch in 2005. YouTube today is one of the most popular internet sites and also the second most popular search engine used after Google in many countries [19]. According to the self-description of YouTube it has over a billion users, almost one-third of all people on the Internet [21]. The research presented in this contribution is particularly interested in the role of online video-sharing platforms, such as YouTube, for the public communication of science. Many citizens do use YouTube as a source of information about issues concerning science, technology and medicine [2]. Research has shown that high reading levels are required to comprehend web-based textual information on science, technology and medicine, and that might be a reason why many people prefer to use and watch YouTube videos in order to find information about scientific and other issues that interest them [6]. YouTube is particularly popular among young people, for instance a recent study in Germany found that 94 percent of youths between 12 and 19 years are on YouTube and that 81 percent use it regularly [13]. Another study from Germany [9] found that more than two thirds (69 percent) of questioned young people between 14 and 29 years said they use YouTube (and other online video platforms) to get informed about science and research. Among those between 30 and 39 years more than half (55 percent) said the same, and among those between 40 and 49 years it is still almost half (46 percent) who get informed via YouTube. When YouTube is so influential and so many people are using YouTube to get informed about science, technology and medicine, the big question is what kind of information do they find there and how the quality of information of YouTube is. The video format has a great potential for disseminating knowledge, it allows using visual and audio channels in isolation or combined for transmitting text, images, animations, films, subtitles, multiple languages and many other innovative and creative means of communication. Technically it could be a powerful tool for education and science, technology and health communication. However, various studies, mainly from the area of health communication have shown, that the quality of information on YouTube about biomedical topics strongly varies and that it is often strongly biased and, from a biomedical or scientific point of view, often inaccurate or erroneous [1]. For instance, one recent study compared information about a reported link between MMR vaccination and the development of autism in children, for which there is no scientific evidence, on YouTube, Google, Wikipedia and the scientific database PubMed [18]. The study authors found that from a biomedical point of view the lowest quality of information was found on YouTube and that the incorrect information also stayed there without being corrected for the longest time. YouTube is also notorious as a sort of Eldorado for conspiracy theories and other highly controversial content, for instance about the Ebola Virus disease [4]. One reason for this is that YouTube is a social media site without any quality or editorial control; virtually everybody can open an account and upload content on this platform [17]. Another reason is that video formats have become extremely popular and rapid technological advances and mobile technologies allow more and more people not just to watch videos,
This content is AI-processed based on ArXiv data.