Originally published 2020-03-19.
Keith Tsuji/SOPA Images/LightRocket/Getty
In the first weeks of the coronavirus outbreak, before it was declared a pandemic, YouTube became one of the main places people went to understand it. Some channels that had never covered medicine saw their audiences jump almost overnight. A Mother Jones investigation by Ali Breland, published on 1 February 2020, followed several of them: a finance commentator with a science doctorate whose virus videos topped a million views, and conspiracy channels claiming the virus was a bioweapon. The story is a useful case study in how fear, attention and money meet online, and in how to judge health information when everyone is anxious.
A finance channel turns to the virus
The best-known example in the report was Chris Martenson, co-founder of Peak Prosperity, a website known for commentary on economic collapse, peak oil and resource shortages. Until late January 2020, his videos were almost entirely about markets and usually drew views in the thousands or low tens of thousands.
Then he turned to the outbreak in China. His video titled "Coronavirus Is Worse Than You've Been Told: Scientist Explains" passed 700,000 views. Over the next four days he posted six more on the subject, which together passed a million. Figures from the analytics site Social Blade showed his channel gaining more than 12,000 subscribers in a single week, far above its normal pace.
The videos pointed viewers to Peak Prosperity's website, where a section on recommended pandemic preparations was reserved for paying members. That is the commercial link at the heart of the story: a surge of worried viewers can translate into subscriptions, ad views and sales.
Scientist or commentator?
The word "scientist" in Martenson's titles drew questions. He holds a 1994 PhD from Duke University's Department of Pathology, where he worked in toxicology. But for at least a decade before 2020, his public work had focused on financial forecasting, not research or medicine.
His business partner Adam Taggart told Mother Jones that the company's mission was "scientists making sense of the world." Taggart himself holds an MBA and studied pre-med as an undergraduate. He said Martenson would describe himself as a researcher trained as a scientist, not someone who works in a lab.
Fair is fair, though. Angela Hewlett, an infectious disease specialist at the University of Nebraska Medical Center, reviewed the videos for the magazine. She noted that Martenson was not a practising physician, but said she saw nothing in his content that worried her. In her view, the titles leaned towards alarm while the content itself mostly summarised media reports. "He doesn't seem to spread misinformation," she said, adding that people were simply hungry for information.
So the problem with this channel, as experts saw it then, was framing rather than false facts: dramatic headlines that promise hidden truths can drive clicks even when the video underneath is fairly ordinary.
The conspiracy channels
Other channels in the report went much further. One called the Atlantis Report posted videos asking whether the virus was part of drone-based biological warfare against China, and claiming it was a bioweapon stolen from a Canadian lab. Its three coronavirus videos drew hundreds of thousands of views. They used a computer-generated voice, contained obvious grammar mistakes and linked to a donations page and Amazon affiliate links.
The Canada story was false. Health Canada and the Public Health Agency of Canada said the claim had no factual basis. Separate questions about where the virus came from, including whether a laboratory accident in Wuhan played a role, have been debated by scientists and intelligence agencies since then. That debate is a different matter from the claim that the virus was stolen and deliberately released, which has never been supported by evidence.
The report also mentioned Sarah Westall, whose channel promoted supplements alongside conspiracy videos, and Christopher Greene, who ran a site called "Bitcoin Rich" and advertised seminar tickets in his alarmist virus videos. Not all of these channels grew: Westall's virus videos performed about the same as her usual uploads. But some, like Greene's, spread widely on Twitter and Facebook too.
How YouTube responded
By early 2020, YouTube had already changed its recommendation system. In January 2019 the company said it would recommend fewer videos that spread conspiracies or misinformation, and it began promoting authoritative news sources on breaking topics. Mother Jones noted that this seemed to limit some creators, yet misleading videos still found large audiences.
As the pandemic grew, the World Health Organization warned of an "infodemic", a flood of information, true and false, that makes it harder for people to find reliable guidance. YouTube introduced specific rules against COVID-19 medical misinformation during 2020. Enforcement was slow at times: one analysis found it took the platform an average of 41 days to remove false Covid videos in the first half of that year.
Those rules did not last forever. YouTube ended several COVID-specific policies in 2023 and later retired the rest, folding the topic into its general medical misinformation policy. That policy still bans content that contradicts health authorities on things such as vaccine safety or dangerous fake cures.
Why fear content performs so well
There are simple reasons alarming videos did well in early 2020. Official information was limited and changing. People were frightened for their families. And platforms reward watch time, so a title that promises secret knowledge or warns that the official story is wrong tends to win clicks.
None of that requires bad intent. A creator can believe they are helping while still benefiting from the panic. But the business model matters: when membership sales, donations, supplements or seminars are attached to frightening content, viewers should ask who gains from their fear.
How to judge a health video
- Check the credentials that matter. A doctorate in one field does not make someone an expert in infectious disease. Look for people who work in the area they are discussing.
- Compare the title with the content. If the headline promises a shocking secret but the video repeats news reports, the title is doing the selling.
- Follow the money. Paywalled "preparation guides", supplements, donation links and seminar tickets are signs to slow down.
- Look for the original source. Good explainers point to studies, health agencies or named experts you can check.
- Use health authorities as your baseline. National public health agencies and the WHO are not perfect, but they publish their reasoning and correct it as evidence changes.
- For personal decisions, talk to a doctor. No video knows your health history.
The early pandemic showed how quickly attention can be turned into income. It also showed that the most useful habit online is an old one: asking who is speaking, what they know, and what they want from you.
Sources: Mother Jones, "YouTube Creators Cash In on Coronavirus Fears" by Ali Breland (1 February 2020); Wikipedia: COVID-19 misinformation; YouTube Help: Medical misinformation policy. Photo: Keith Tsuji/SOPA Images/LightRocket via Getty Images.
COMMENTS