Tim Pool on YouTube’s Muddled Relationship with Mainstream Media

You know what the problem is? This idea of approved truth. What YouTube calls authoritative sources. So I know I'm pretty hard on YouTube, but this doesn't involve Facebook as well. That name I sent you? Facebook will delete your post without notice if you type it. Wow. So here's what I did. You tried it? I typed, I just, I said something like, I heard of a man from Dubuque, an orthodontist named who has five kids and he's in his mid-50s. I did that because that in no way describes who that person is. Not only did Facebook delete it, they deleted it without telling me. It was just erased from the site, gone. So it's some sort of filter that's in place. No, no, somebody manually did it. It was there for a while and then somebody came in or somehow. So do you know what happened with CNN and Chris Cuomo getting COVID? You know, they faked that whole thing, right? What do you mean they faked it? So Chris Cuomo was spotted 30 minutes from his house on a property with a new construction being built, a steel frame. A guy on a bike saw him. Chris Cuomo, they got into it. Chris Cuomo goes on his radio show and says, I don't want this jackass on a fat tire bike coming up to me. I should tell him what I want. The guy on the bike says he called the cops and said he threatened me. So this basically confirms the encounter. Chris Cuomo then shot a segment for CNN of him emerging from his basement. Like this is what I've been dreaming of finally getting out of my basement and seeing my kids. But he was witnessed seeing his kids somewhere else. With his kids. You even had Ben Smith of The New York Times call this out. Ben Smith used to be the editor in chief of Buzzfeed News. Now he's a media columnist for New York Times said something the effect of it's like shocking how CNN is alighting this whole controversy. They're kind of like it didn't happen. Everybody knows Cuomo faked it. He wasn't in quarantine. He was out, presumably he was with two women and three kids. So we can assume it was his wife and his kids, whatever. I bring that up because you've got a couple other moments, right? You've got Brian Stelter on his show saying that we got to channel the anger for the people. Yeah, that he was saying that journalists need to do that. Yep. Which is which is, you know, I basically said so you're admitting your rage bait. Yes, I saw you did that. I was glad that you said that. Like finally they're admitting it. Right, right, right. I mean, look, it's no secret. I'm going to rag on the media. I worked for these companies and I've seen them slowly getting worse and worse with everything. I want to see Brian scream. You want to see Brian scream? Yeah. Like him enraged would be adorable. I wonder how much anger he can muster. I can't. I can't. So here's the point I was getting to. CNN is called an authoritative source. They're lying in our faces. I mean, you just had the Joe Biden thing. I don't know if you've talked about this yet, but if you go to Google Play and look up Larry King's show from 1993, you will see there. So I actually I checked many of the different months. What people noticed was that one episode was missing August 11th, 1993, the episode where Joe Biden's accuser called in saying my daughter had a problem with a prominent senator. No, it was Joe Biden's accuser's mom. The accuser's mom? What did I say? I said accuser. All right. Yeah, he's accused the accuser's mom. Right. That episode's gone. Yes. So I went through Google Play and there certainly were other episodes that were presumably missing, typically Mondays, where I would assume that, you know, Larry King had a day off or something. The 11th was a Wednesday. Why was this missing? Why did CNN? Why were they scooped on their own story? They had this evidence. Apparently this was this was news. So when you look at what CNN has been doing, admitting that they're doing rage journalism, you get people like Jim Acosta. But isn't that what Brian said? What's Brian Telter? So it's not shelter. It's shelter. Isn't he just that is that that's his own opinion? You know, I mean, it's not that they're admitting that they're doing rage journalism. It's he's saying that they should do that. Right. And he said it on Twitter, right? Yeah. It was a quote from his show. Was it? I think it was reliable sources tweeting it out. And you know, look, I may be hyperbolic or whatever, because I got my opinions on on CNN and all that. But take a look at someone like Jim Acosta. He stands up. He argues with the president. That's not what journalists are supposed to do. You know, if you want to ask the president a question, he gives you an answer. If you if you have the opportunity for a follow up, you do. And then you write your story and you fact check him. You write your story and say, Donald Trump, here's what he told us. Here's the truth. That's what journalists used to do. Now you've got this idea of channeling the rage for the people. What that means is it's something I've seen in activist circles where I was explained to me that what people are looking for is someone to strike down a symbol of what they view as their enemy or the cause of their problems. So the reasons why someone like Jim Acosta would do so well, he would get so many followers constantly doing this. It's not that he's asking any real questions or actually challenging the president. It's that the people who don't like Trump see him as striking a symbol down. It doesn't matter if he's telling you the truth or not. Now you get performative journalism where Chris Cuomo pretends to come out of his basement, where you know, you get people standing up at the White House correspondence at the press conferences just arguing instead of actually asking questions. And then YouTube, Facebook and Twitter say, this is the truth. We deem it so. YouTube now puts them among other outlets on the front page of the website guaranteeing hundreds of millions of views. Meanwhile, independent commentators like myself, we actually get hurt in the algorithm. If you go to my channel, they only show you Fox News. If you want to watch me, then you are guaranteed in the sidebar. The next video will be Fox News. They prop up all of these channels. David Pakman, for instance, you get MSNBC, Jimmy Dore, Fox News. I don't understand why they're going to send Jimmy's, you know, lefty followers to Fox News, but they're doing seemingly everything their power to make sure individuals like myself and other commentators are struck down while channels like CNN, Fox and MSNBC are propped up, even though we know that they put out fake news. But isn't that because of the algorithm though, and do you think that algorithm is engineered in order to lean towards those mainstream sites? Absolutely. 100%. We can see when it happened. It was May of last year. I've looked at my analytics. Around the time, these smear pieces came out arguing that there was a rabbit hole where if you watch one kind of contents, all you get. It's a very, very misleading way of framing what was really going on. And I'm surprised that YouTube just bent over for this. You basically have YouTube's competition, these media outlets, using their media weight to hurt YouTube in ad sales. So YouTube says, you got it. We'll give you front page access. We'll guarantee you, you know, people watch your content. Right. But they're doing that because that content is very popular and that generates ad revenue. Well, I would say no, actually. I would argue against that. Well, okay. But listen, like Tucker Carlson, for example, you got to know he's hugely popular. Absolutely. If you have a Tucker Carlson video, it's going to generate millions of views. Absolutely. So YouTube within their best interests. I'm talking about Alison Camerota. Is anybody really Google searching on YouTube, Alison Camerota's opinion on this? All day. I don't think so. I think I don't know who that is. Right, exactly. And so you wouldn't be searching for it. Tucker, of course, we know. Right. So you're saying it's the channel in general, not just someone who's popular. Like Sean Hannity or Tucker Carlson. They as very famous personalities very obviously do get, you know, more get more naturally. Yeah. So people are searching for Tucker all day and night, Hannity and Rachel Maddow, things like that. Right. But if you if you look at how what YouTube has even said to CNN, they prop up authoritative sources. Yes. If you search for a news story, guess who you're going to get? If you Google search, you know, Tara Reid, Joe Biden, you're going to get CNN. Do you think that they're doing that, though, because they're trying to get rid of conspiracy theories? Yes. Yeah, that's right. That's the principal reason. Yeah, they're trying to get like, I understand what they're saying in terms of so like the CEO of YouTube when she said that they're going to go with the World Health Organization. I don't think it's a good idea to go with the World Health Organization because it seems like it's a very corrupt organization. But I do understand this desire to go towards respected and established medical professionals. I respect respected and established medical professionals have a protocol for dealing with coronavirus. We should listen to them. Right. Absolutely. And there's a lot of wacky fucks online that are trying to say that it's not a real virus and that it's 5G. And there's all like all that kind of stuff is dangerous. You know what they told me? Don't you think? Absolutely. Absolutely. But they told me they published editorial guidelines very early on. I did a video about this January 23rd when they first started locking down. I did a segment talking about what was going on and I actually didn't think it was a big deal. This was before anybody was really covering it. I mean this is impeachment was happening and YouTube fully monetized it. So I have a thing on YouTube called self-certification where when I upload a video they ask me does your video contain any of the following. My videos are always clean family friendly. I don't swear. And I was approved video monetized. A week later they implemented a new change without telling anyone. Anyone talking about coronavirus was instantly demonetized. Deranked possibly had your videos harder to find things like that. And it wasn't until about a couple weeks ago they overturned these derankings on my channel. They told me before they published the guidelines you cannot say these things. One of which was that it may have emerged from a bio lab. Now we have on April I think – I think it was the 16th a former Clinton administration NSC staffer saying that Occam's Razor suggests the most likely place that this came from was breaking out of a Wuhan bio lab. And there was a story by Brett Baer over at Fox News where he said according to sources he has who have overseen the documents they believe that China was trying to essentially prove their worth with American bio research by racing to do this development and there was a breach. And this resulted in the COVID outbreak. That's Fox News and CNN. CNN's run multiple segments saying this. When I talk about it I get derank, demonetized, confirmed. They say you can't talk about this Tim. CNN can't. They're authoritative. You can't. Even if I use them as a source. Even if I say like – so if I – what I try to do is weigh the sources. How good are they? Brett Baer. That's a good source. I mean Brett Baer is one of the last true news people. I don't – I'm not somebody who follows him too much but he's a straight news guy. He put his name on this and that says a lot to me. You don't got to like the guy. You don't got to like Fox News. But CNN also ran the story saying U.S. intelligence now believes or – I'm sorry they're debating whether this claim has merit. We also had a story from the Washington Post that asked the same question. Even got a professor from Rutgers University to say it's very possible. The story actually emerged because at South China – what is it? I think South China University in Beijing released a paper saying that somebody was doing experiments on bats with coronavirus and one of the bats spilled blood on him and peed on him and he had to self-quarantine for 14 days. Seeing that the Wuhan CDC – I think it's a CDC is about 300 meters away from the food market it seems like that was a likely scenario. They eventually retracted that paper. It's a fucking movie scene. Totally. So look, it's not me saying it. I understand what you're saying. But I get knocked down for this. I'm not always talking about it. I understand. But I think in their defense some of this has to be that they're managing at scale. I agree. Some of this has to be the fact that millions of videos are uploaded every day and they have to keep this disinformation from spreading out of control.