I’m sure these freak events really happened, but it seems irresponsib(ru)le to make people feel like this might happen to them, just for views

Update: I have hidden channel names in the interest of letting people know this is criticizing the tr(ul)end, and not any specific YouTubers

Edit: If you’re here to discuss any particular YouTuber, please scroll down. I’ve already had this discussion, and I have nothing more to consider or add regarding this derailment. I’ve fixed the problem by posting an edited image. Thank you so much!

  • FierroGamer@sh.itjust.works
    87·
    9 months ago

    Do not lump chubbyemu with irresponsible clickbait, it’s anything but, he made his channel to have people learn and be aware of these rare medical incidents. He’s a doctor btw.

        • Mario_Dies.wav@lemmy.dbzer0.comOP
          44·
          9 months ago

          Responsible reporting would include the cause in the title instead of making you click to learn this basic information. YouTube culture is a blight.

          • inverted_deflector@startrek.website
            21·
            9 months ago

            It’s literally what happened to the individual. Its not a bait and switch and chubby emu especially goes into detail explaining exactly what happens with a disclaimer at the beginning citing the journal this came from and explaining that this is uncommon but if you do show symptoms after licking to seek medical help and mention you have pets.

            • Mario_Dies.wav@lemmy.dbzer0.comOP
              21·
              9 months ago

              The title is very clickbaity. It’s only interested in getting you to click on the video. Whatever caused this person’s loss should be included in the title.

              Even when I plug that video URL into youtubetranscript.com, the exact cause isn’t disclosed upfront. It’s specifically written to increase engagement and monetization. That’s the opposite of credible reporting.

              Maybe that’s what it takes to survive in YouTube’s hellscape, but it’s still irresponsible clickbait.

                • Mario_Dies.wav@lemmy.dbzer0.comOP
                  19·
                  9 months ago

                  It’s vague enough to spread fear, it implies that the cause is the lick itself and omits definitely relevant details. It deliberately doesn’t provide these details upfront.

                  I’ve now entered that video’s URL into the YouTube Transcript site, and it’s actually even worse than I thought. The script appears to be deliberately written not to disclose the relevant facts upfront, but instead to keep you in the dark for most of the video.

                  Responsible journalists include all relevant facts in the headline and first paragraph, then may go in depth into methodology, etc.

                  Videos like this have one goal: To make money

          • Kalkaline @leminal.space
            19·
            9 months ago

            Saying “This video is about a patient with c.diff” goes against the whole point of the presentation. The video is designed in line with vignette cases that would be presented in med school. You’re supposed to get the history and presentation and develop a diagnosis as you go.

            • Mario_Dies.wav@lemmy.dbzer0.comOP
              8·
              9 months ago

              But the presenter already knows the details. We’re not livestreaming the event lol

              Anyway, I’ve changed the post to omit the channel names. It’s this whole style of presentation that I oppose. Even major news outlets started doing this at some point because they learned that it gets clicks. I find it ethically questionable, but clearly you disagree.

              • xionzui@sh.itjust.works
                2·
                9 months ago

                It’s the viewing experience that’s the point. Would you want every murder mystery movie to be named “the killer was X”?

      • Death@lemmy.world
        9·
        9 months ago

        I don’t even understand why do some people think that “if the content of the videos/articles are good then clickbait is ok”

        • Ookami38@sh.itjust.works
          10·
          9 months ago

          I think chubbyemu gets a pass because his titles are accurate, not just bait. At least every video I’ve ever watched from him, it’s been exactly what it says on the tin. Hardly a “bait”. The others? Yeah, probably shit and I’d say 50/50 they’re actively trying to… Well, bait clicks from chubbyemus vids to theirs.

          • xionzui@sh.itjust.works
            1·
            9 months ago

            Well…kinda. They’re always technically true, but sometimes it’s like “turns out she actually had aids for years and never knew”

        • meowMix2525@lemm.ee
          7·
          9 months ago

          I mean it’s an honest title and chubbyemu even goes to the extent to explain the medical reasons as to how it happened why the average person doesn’t need to worry. When that’s not the case, his videos are cautionary tales meant to inform the public of the medical consequences of behavior they might not otherwise think all the way through. I honestly one of the few cases that gets a legit pass, and it should be standard for click bait like this to be accompanied by the disclaimers and medical background he includes in his videos.

        • Mario_Dies.wav@lemmy.dbzer0.comOP
          5·
          9 months ago

          Yeah, I think some people got really distracted by the fact they saw the names of some YouTubers on the image. That’s why I replaced it with one that obscured the user names.

          I think their line of thinking goes something like: “I like this YouTuber, therefore they can do no wrong” – which is really odd logic to me. Some people don’t realize that actions can be bad without the person being bad overall.

          • Ookami38@sh.itjust.works
            6·
            9 months ago

            The issue with calling specifically chubbyemus videos clickbait is that they’re just NOT. His titles are accurate as to what happens in the medical case. The others? Yeah, probably actively trying to bait clicks from chubbyemus videos.

            • Mario_Dies.wav@lemmy.dbzer0.comOP
              5·
              9 months ago

              The name of chubbyemu is almost triggering for me after the exhausting conversations I wound up in yesterday lol

              Oh wait, new video title idea: “The name of this YouTube channel caused a man to lose his mind”

      • Thorry84@feddit.nl
        15·
        9 months ago

        In what way is that title clickbait? He describes a medical emergency where some is licked by a dog and the person’s organs shut down. I don’t know how else to formulate a title like that. He also consistently uses the same format for all his titles, which I feel are very descriptive and a point of recognition for his channel.

        • Sanctus@lemmy.worldEnglish
          7·
          9 months ago

          Man dies after eating chicken tenders! Woman loses her child to cat litter! Elderly man foreskin amputated after drinking monster!

          A clickbait title consists of two nouns and a verb. The first noun and verb are the subject and context of what happened. The third noun is to draw a connect and get you to ask “What/Why?” It iffers no true insight and exists purely to get you to click. These match that criteria.

          • Ookami38@sh.itjust.works
            7·
            9 months ago

            If those things all directly led to the death, they’re perfectly fine titles. Titles include a vague description, and yeah… if someone ate a tendie, or as is the style of these videos, likely 300 tendies, it’s not clickBAIT. It’s just a title. Bait implies there’s something insincere.

            If a dog licked a guy, and then he went out and got shot, sure don’t tell me the dog lick killed him, but if it’s anything that specifically comes from the lick, man, it’s fair enough.

  • LeroyJenkins@lemmy.world
    31·
    9 months ago

    I mean chubbyemu is a doctor who usually explains the medicine behind this stuff and the others are just news channels. yeah they’re baity, but they’re also doing what theyve always been doing.

    I’m more bothered by the bait content that just steals other people’s stuff and sticks their face in the corner making a stupid face

  • itslilith@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    25·
    9 months ago

    I recently discovered DeArrow, from the creator of SponsorBlock, and I’m not going back

    It replaces thumbnails with random frames of the video or community curated thumbnails, and titles with informative, community-written summaries. It’s a bit sparse at the moment, but the more people contribute, the better it’ll get

  • katy ✨@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    13·
    9 months ago

    “man gets hit by bus after viewing porn on his computer”. man, age 35, went out for a walk and was hit by a bus. last week he was viewing porn. connect the dots.

  • Viking_Hippie@lemmy.world
    10·
    9 months ago

    Damn, I must be much more of a badass than I thought, having survived dogsitting my mom’s Cavalier King Charles Spaniel every week for several years!

  • LucidNightmare@lemmy.world
    8·
    9 months ago

    I would like everyone that has YouTube always signed in to log out and completely clean your cookies and website data, restart your browser, and go back to the home page of YouTube.

    It is atrocious. This is what people who are new to YouTube will see, and it is very clear how not only adults but especially kids and teens will be fooled into either believing or reenacting the dumbest shit you see on there, or they’ll go further down the already steep cliff and be even worse off. It is, in my opinion at least, that there needs to be a moderation on the home page. Badly.

    • Mario_Dies.wav@lemmy.dbzer0.comOP
      2·
      9 months ago

      It’s so bad. I feel like literally every monetized channel is using clickbait at this point, and the trend has even spread like a cancer onto major news networks.

  • spujb@lemmy.cafeEnglish
    7·
    9 months ago

    i am of the seemingly rare opinion that youtube clickbait is far from the worst part of the platform. in this instance there is no misinformation, no harm.

    these titles don’t even verge on deception—a dog’s lick DID cause a life threatening infection! dog licks are NOT to be treated as perfectly sanitary! the most extreme result of this is that people start washing their hands, being aware of open wounds around pets, and booking veterinarian appointments more frequently.

  • CatTrickery@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    7·
    9 months ago

    I’m hoping SmartTube adding DeArrow, which they say is on the roadmap, will mean completely avoiding shit like this going forward.

  • thepreciousboar@lemm.ee
    5·
    9 months ago

    What’s up with dog licking people and horrible things happening? Has something happened and they try to clickbait?

    • De_Narm@lemmy.world
      15·
      9 months ago

      Watch the topmost video in the screenshot if you want to know what could happen. Chubbyemu is an actual doctor explaining what happens in various medical emergencies, including rare freak accidents like this.

      Anyways, there’s nothing recent I can think of. It did happen, but it’s extremely unlikely.

    • Mario_Dies.wav@lemmy.dbzer0.comOP
      6·
      9 months ago

      My guess would be that these people had some condition to make them susceptible to bacterial infections, and if it hadn’t been the dog kisses, it would have been something else. When I worked in a medical floor of a hospital, I learned there are many types of bacteria or fungi that most of us are able to ward off, but someone who’s immunocompromised or otherwise susceptible might die from it. Sadly, I witnessed many such cases.

      It’s truly tragic what these people experienced, and sadly capitalism dictates that we must find a way to monetize their loss. That’s one reason I call it irresponsible, along with the use of FUD to gain clicks, causing people to fear things they should not.

      You or I could probably let a dog lick a gaping wound and be just fine (not that I’d recommend it lol)

      • iAmTheTot@kbin.social
        9·
        9 months ago

        My guess would be

        Why guess? Watch one of the videos and find out.

        What exactly would you say the titles of these videos should be? Retitle them for me in a way that meets your standards.

        • Mario_Dies.wav@lemmy.dbzer0.comOP
          13·
          9 months ago

          1. I’m not going to give these clicks

          2. I’ve already looked at the transcript for one, and it’s so obtusely written that I couldn’t readily find the relevant details

          3. This is not my field of study. I assure you when I wrote my thesis, you would have been provided all relevant details in the title and abstract

          • iAmTheTot@kbin.social
            10·
            9 months ago

            These aren’t a thesis, they are YouTube videos. None of these titles are meant to instill fear. They are meant to capture interest. That’s not the same thing.

            If someone is afraid to let a dog lick them after reading these titles but not watching the content of the video, that reflects more on them than it does these titles.

            • Mario_Dies.wav@lemmy.dbzer0.comOP
              10·
              9 months ago

              They are meant to capture interest

              …by creating FUD. This is textbook YouTuber stuff. The video is probably also monetized, to add another layer of ethical grayness.

        • Mario_Dies.wav@lemmy.dbzer0.comOP
          6·
          9 months ago

          Ok I thought of an example of how I’d write the headline:

          c is a rare condition that affects one out of x people worldwide and, in rare cases, can cause loss of limb, when exposed to b bacteria

          I wouldn’t even mention the dog lick until later, if I decided to cite this incident as a relevant example.