A YouTube Guru Used AI To Go Viral. But Was It Legit? — Transcript

Full transcript

1. 0:00There's one YouTube guru channel that
2. 0:01has always stood out to me as being
3. 0:03absurdly bold. That channel is Jack
4. 0:05Conte. Jack has built himself a
5. 0:06reputation of being a YouTube shorts
6. 0:08genius with 14 videos on his channel
7. 0:11showcasing viral success. But after
8. 0:12digging deep into Jack's content
9. 0:14history, I had to ask myself, is Jack a
10. 0:16YouTube genius or YouTube's biggest
11. 0:19liar? But my investigation started with
12. 0:20just one video of his. I blew up a
13. 0:22channel in 24 hours using AI. Basically,
14. 0:25this guy Jack gives himself the
15. 0:27seemingly impossible task of blowing up
16. 0:29a new channel in 24 hours using AI. If
17. 0:32you know anything about YouTube advice
18. 0:34gurus, you know where this is going. But
19. 0:36before we dive in, I have to take a
20. 0:37second to say I don't know Jack as a
21. 0:39person and this is not a hit piece on
22. 0:41him personally. I'm not giving you
23. 0:43caffeine fiends an excuse to go and
24. 0:45spread hate Jack Conte's way. First
25. 0:47things first, my AI YouTube channel that
26. 0:49I blew up in 7 days and I want you to
27. 0:51start doing the [music] same but even
28. 0:53faster. Really, what he wants is for us
29. 0:55to believe that he knows everything
30. 0:56about YouTube growth and the YouTube
31. 0:58algorithm. Just be honest about it, man.
32. 0:59And secondly, he does that thing when
33. 1:00he's researching the niche that most
34. 1:03YouTube growth channels do.
35. 1:04>> We are going to be taking inspiration
36. 1:06from this channel here, Brazzan.
37. 1:08>> He finds another channel that's
38. 1:09successful called Brazzan and he
39. 1:11copycats everything on that channel that
40. 1:13caused it to blow up except for the
41. 1:15topic of the videos. But in looking at
42. 1:17this channel Brazzan, he actually outs
43. 1:19them as being a channel who's faking
44. 1:22their content using AI.
45. 1:23>> This content is being created with AI.
46. 1:26>> a weird moment because it's like, yay,
47. 1:29good on you for exposing this fake
48. 1:31channel, that's amazing. But you're
49. 1:32about to go and do the same thing. What
50. 1:34was the point of that? It just makes no
51. 1:35sense coming from him.
52. 1:38>> I'm incapable of drinking liquids.
53. 1:40>> But again, let's revisit that phrase,
54. 1:41taking inspiration from. I talked about
55. 1:44something called copycatting in my last
56. 1:45AI video and this is what I'm talking
57. 1:47about.
58. 1:48>> title, we are going to take inspiration
59. 1:50from Brazzan.
60. 1:51>> Dude, you're copying his format. Your
61. 1:52title looks exactly like his does. This
62. 1:55is them right next to each other. Like,
63. 1:56just own up to it at this point. He even
64. 1:58copies the quirk in Brazzers' videos
65. 2:00where they go like way overboard with
66. 2:02overcomplicating the tasks they're doing
67. 2:04in their videos. The only thing he
68. 2:06changed was the actual thing the video
69. 2:08was about, which is like just enough to
70. 2:10call it not stealing content. We're kind
71. 2:12of getting ahead of ourselves though.
72. 2:14His ideation and breakdown section of
73. 2:16his video is actually very good. He
74. 2:18literally shows you how he generates the
75. 2:20format of his shorts. Sure, it's being
76. 2:22ripped from another video, but this is
77. 2:25actually good stuff you can use for your
78. 2:27own videos. You know, this is good
79. 2:28advice. When we get to the idea of what
80. 2:30his content is going to be about though,
81. 2:32is when I start to lose it.
82. 2:33>> And what I think we can do is create an
83. 2:35AI pet salon.
84. 2:37>> As a dog groomer myself, I cringed when
85. 2:39I saw he'd be doing this kind of
86. 2:41content. I know what dog groomers go
87. 2:43through on a day-to-day basis to do
88. 2:44their jobs. They don't get paid enough.
89. 2:46So, I just can't respect content that
90. 2:48cuts corners to fake that kind of work.
91. 2:50But, it gets worse.
92. 2:51>> I don't have the funds to invest in a
93. 2:53real pet salon, nor do we have the time.
94. 2:56>> Then, maybe just pick a niche you can
95. 2:59do. So, he starts working on the content
96. 3:01now, right? No, he doesn't even come up
97. 3:03with the channel name himself. He has
98. 3:04ChatGPT do it for him. Dude has all this
99. 3:07YouTube experience and like can clearly
100. 3:09grow channels and he couldn't even be
101. 3:10bothered to at least do the freaking
102. 3:12channel name himself. Come on, Jack. I
103. 3:14know this video is about using AI to
104. 3:16blow the channel up, but at least put a
105. 3:18little bit of your own brain power into
106. 3:19some of these processes. Eventually, he
107. 3:21will, but wait, it gets funnier.
108. 3:23>> What made sense to me was that we do
109. 3:25start with a scruffy dog. Then, we
110. 3:27conduct an assessment where we measure
111. 3:29the fur length and the dirt coverage.
112. 3:31From there, we go into an isolate phase
113. 3:33and each tangle is cleaned using a
114. 3:35vacuum.
115. 3:36>> If you know anything about dog grooming,
116. 3:38this process makes no sense. Groomers do
117. 3:40not have the time or energy to measure
118. 3:42hair length on a dog. Are you serious?
119. 3:45It made sense for Brazzers to
120. 3:46overcomplicate their processes because
121. 3:48they're working with inanimate objects.
122. 3:50For dogs, it doesn't translate. See,
123. 3:52this is what happens when you have AI
124. 3:55fake your content and you don't research
125. 3:57it and only go off of intuition when
126. 3:59making the video.
127. 4:00>> do approach YouTube like this, you are
128. 4:02leaving nothing up to luck.
129. 4:04>> You're right. It's not fully luck. It's
130. 4:06copycatting. Anyone can do that. In
131. 4:08fact, somebody did. It was another
132. 4:10channel that popped up on my home page
133. 4:12that copied the YouTube short Jack is
134. 4:14going to make literally one-to-one. And
135. 4:16they used AI. I'm pretty sure they
136. 4:18actually did the same exact one. Now,
137. 4:20that is different from what Jack is
138. 4:21doing. What the other person did was
139. 4:23like just stealing content. my point
140. 4:25about AI. It's so easy to steal.
141. 4:27>> Even if you provide AI a lot of
142. 4:29information, you need to remember that
143. 4:32it has no experience at running YouTube
144. 4:34channels. So, you should never rely upon
145. 4:37it.
146. 4:37>> Wait, dude. The entire concept of this
147. 4:39video is about relying on AI. What are
148. 4:40you talking about? But now that we got
149. 4:42those banger highlights out of the way,
150. 4:43we get to the point where he finally
151. 4:45generates the scenes for his AI video
152. 4:47and well,
153. 4:49>> is how the dog salon is going to look.
154. 4:53Higgsfield did a great job.
155. 4:54>> Higgsfield did not do a great job.
156. 4:56Higgsfield did an okay job. First of
157. 4:58all, what the hell is that table in the
158. 4:59middle? That's not a dog grooming table.
159. 5:01If you were to groom a dog in that
160. 5:02salon, a dog is 100% going to fall off
161. 5:05of that table. There's no safety leads
162. 5:08or any harnessing. And also, look at the
163. 5:10tub. Where's the shampoo coming from? I
164. 5:12don't see a bather box. Now, take a look
165. 5:14at the tub and faucet and all the hoses.
166. 5:16I see three of them. Every single one of
167. 5:18them is going to a different place in
168. 5:20that tub. And the one hose that's fully
169. 5:21visible isn't even connected to
170. 5:23anything. And this next part set my
171. 5:25caffeine levels to over 9,000.
172. 5:28>> They eventually get into the isolate
173. 5:29[music] phase where the dog is placed
174. 5:31into a bath and each tangle is cleaned
175. 5:33one by one using a water vacuum.
176. 5:35>> Why would you have water like that? Dogs
177. 5:37don't soak in bathing tubs usually. It's
178. 5:39such an inefficient way to wash and
179. 5:41lather a dog cuz you'd have to apply the
180. 5:44product, then and the product off, then
181. 5:46you'd have to drain the water, and then
182. 5:48you'd have to wash the legs of the dog
183. 5:50again to make sure you got the shampoo
184. 5:52and oil products off, and then using the
185. 5:54vacuum to clean the singular strands of
186. 5:57hair, that wouldn't work because the dog
187. 5:58was matted beyond belief, like almost
188. 6:01pelted. There's no way you're going to
189. 6:02be able to brush all that out. Can you
190. 6:04tell I'm a groomer? That's one of my
191. 6:05biggest problems with this video is he's
192. 6:07not making these shorts because he has a
193. 6:09passion for dog grooming. He's doing it
194. 6:12to farm views and subscribers. The
195. 6:14quality and authenticity of the content
196. 6:16doesn't really matter as long as it
197. 6:18looks kind of real. But if you need more
198. 6:20proof that he doesn't really care about
199. 6:22the channel he's just made, take a look
200. 6:23at this. I went back over to Higgs Field
201. 6:25to start creating the second video. He
202. 6:27works on a second video. This video
203. 6:29never gets posted. Now, why is that?
204. 6:31Because obviously the first video, it's
205. 6:33going to blow up. It blows up like it
206. 6:34usually does. So, there's no need for a
207. 6:36second video. I'll take a second and
208. 6:37give a little bit more credit to this
209. 6:38guy, though. He at least shows his
210. 6:41analytics charts for his views. But also
211. 6:43on the flip side of that, this is where
212. 6:45things started to get kind of weird for
213. 6:47me. As somebody who's posted hundreds of
214. 6:49YouTube shorts of both good and bad
215. 6:51quality, I've never
216. 6:53had a short react like this with
217. 6:56YouTube's algorithm. With my analytics,
218. 6:58I always get that first initial push
219. 7:00that he showed, and then it's always
220. 7:02followed by a long plateau. And the
221. 7:04shorts that I've had that have gotten a
222. 7:06lot of views have accumulated them over
223. 7:08time. So, I just don't know how he keeps
224. 7:10getting bumps in his view count like
225. 7:12that, especially with the first upload.
226. 7:13And if you look, most of this is coming
227. 7:15from the shorts feed, not even from
228. 7:17browse features or suggested videos.
229. 7:19This just makes no sense to me because
230. 7:21in all of my time on YouTube, when
231. 7:23YouTube shorts were a thing, YouTube's
232. 7:24algorithm has not behaved this way, at
233. 7:26least for my shorts. Hold up, hold up. I
234. 7:29have to interrupt here. I was going to
235. 7:31leave well enough alone with this, but
236. 7:32something wasn't sitting right with me.
237. 7:34It's those extra bumps in the shorts
238. 7:36feed for a channel with no prior
239. 7:38uploads. I had to do some more digging
240. 7:40into the Street Dog Salon short. First,
241. 7:41I looked at other YouTube shorts that
242. 7:43tried to recreate Jack's success the
243. 7:45same way. None of them even came close
244. 7:47to the amount of views that Jack and
245. 7:49they did the exact same thing with the
246. 7:51same exact video format. You'd think if
247. 7:53YouTube's algorithm loved the short that
248. 7:56Jack made so much, it would push these
249. 7:58other AI dog grooming shorts, right? Cuz
250. 8:00remember, that's the whole point of him
251. 8:01showing his process and how he's
252. 8:03structuring his video so that we all can
253. 8:06replicate my actions to get similar
254. 8:08results. There was even somebody in the
255. 8:09comments who did the exact same thing
256. 8:12that Jack did. And guess what? Lo and
257. 8:14behold, their video got no views. And
258. 8:17they didn't copy him one to one, either.
259. 8:19Their topic was completely different.
260. 8:20Something suspicious here. I dug deeper.
261. 8:24I went on to Social Blade to see for
262. 8:25myself the view metrics for the street
263. 8:27dog salon short. To get the full history
264. 8:29of the views on his YouTube short, I
265. 8:30would have to pay to get the full
266. 8:32version of Social Blade. I was not doing
267. 8:34that. Instead, I remembered that VidIQ
268. 8:37had a free Chrome extension you could
269. 8:38download for YouTube that has a tool
270. 8:41that shows you the video history. So, I
271. 8:43downloaded that. And what I found was
272. 8:45confusing, to say the least. See, Jack
273. 8:48uploaded the street dog salon short on
274. 8:50March 10th of 2026. But, according to
275. 8:53VidIQ's view tracker, his short didn't
276. 8:55get any significant views until April
277. 8:5728th of 2026. That's a month and a half
278. 9:01since the short was active on YouTube.
279. 9:02But in Jack's video, remember, he's
280. 9:04showing his short getting views right
281. 9:05after he uploaded it. The timeline isn't
282. 9:08adding up here. What's even weirder is
283. 9:09his video, I blew up a channel in 24
284. 9:11hours using AI. That video was uploaded
285. 9:13on May 1st. It's exactly 3 days after
286. 9:16the view spike on the street dog salon
287. 9:18short. Now, let's defend Jack here.
288. 9:21VidIQ is reliant on AI to drive itself.
289. 9:24We all know that AI is not fully
290. 9:26reliable. It's quite possible that
291. 9:28because Jack's short, you know, blew up
292. 9:30and got so many views so quickly, that
293. 9:33it messed with the VidIQ view tracking
294. 9:35metric. So, there could be a
295. 9:36discrepancy. However, I went and looked
296. 9:39at a lot of my own YouTube shorts and
297. 9:41found no such discrepancies in the view
298. 9:43tracking. And I will say in his video,
299. 9:45he literally uses a handheld camera to
300. 9:47like record his screen that shows, you
301. 9:50know, the actual view count his video is
302. 9:51getting. So, if he faked this part of
303. 9:53the video, I have no clue how he did it.
304. 9:54But, like I said, in this instance, it
305. 9:56is possible that VidIQ is just not
306. 9:59tracking his YouTube short properly. If
307. 10:00it was just that, then fair. Except, I
308. 10:03went deeper.
309. 10:05I decided to check out Jack's coaching
310. 10:07course website. Immediately, I noticed a
311. 10:09lot of red flags. First of all, up
312. 10:11front, there are no prices listed for
313. 10:13how much his coaching course costs. You
314. 10:15have to go on to his website and submit
315. 10:16an application to find that out. Unless
316. 10:18you're like me and found a link to the
317. 10:20course cost on Reddit. $680
318. 10:23for 90 days of coaching. And here also,
319. 10:25we found another red flag. His course
320. 10:28says that you'll be using a channel that
321. 10:30was pre-set up by Jack himself. It
322. 10:32doesn't look like you can even use your
323. 10:33own channel if you do his course. That's
324. 10:35very interesting. What is he doing with
325. 10:37these channels behind the scenes to make
326. 10:39them go viral? We'll never know. Then, I
327. 10:41looked at the testimonial videos on his
328. 10:42website. And boom, red flag number
329. 10:44three. All of the channel names and
330. 10:46video titles in his testimonial videos
331. 10:48are blurred. When YouTube coaches do
332. 10:50this, it means one of two things. Either
333. 10:52one, they blur them because they're
334. 10:53afraid of the channels getting banned
335. 10:55because sometimes they break community
336. 10:56guidelines on YouTube. Or two, they just
337. 10:59know that the content is bad and
338. 11:00exploitative and they don't want you to
339. 11:01find it. However, I did find one
340. 11:04testimonial that was not blurred. It was
341. 11:06for a channel called Sue Way that Jack
342. 11:08claimed was making 100 million views a
343. 11:10month. I figured, great. I'll go on
344. 11:12YouTube and I'll verify this channel for
345. 11:14myself. Lo and behold, I couldn't find
346. 11:15it. There was only one channel called
347. 11:17Sue Way with the same profile photo as
348. 11:19shown in the testimonial video and the
349. 11:20same channel name. And that video had
350. 11:22one YouTube short upload that got 53
351. 11:25views and it had two subscribers. Red
352. 11:27flag number four. We're not going to
353. 11:29stop there though. Remember, Jack did
354. 11:31not blur anything in this testimonial,
355. 11:32including the three featured top content
356. 11:34shorts in the bottom right of the
357. 11:36dashboard. So, I went and did my
358. 11:37digging, and I found all three shorts
359. 11:40that were listed. They don't belong to a
360. 11:41channel called Sue Way. They belong to a
361. 11:43channel called the Third Eye Network.
362. 11:45The shorts he was having this person
363. 11:47create were fake stories about Cristiano
364. 11:50Ronaldo told from the perspective of his
365. 11:52partner, Georgina Rodriguez. Except in
366. 11:54the descriptions of the shorts, if you
367. 11:56read them, it literally says that the
368. 11:58stories were completely made up. are AI.
369. 12:01This is based off of nothing. They
370. 12:02essentially wrote these fake stories and
371. 12:04made it seem like Georgina was narrating
372. 12:07them. It literally is just inauthentic
373. 12:08content that's spreading misinformation.
374. 12:10See, this is why YouTube coaches blur
375. 12:13the channel names. They don't want you
376. 12:15to discover things like this. But this
377. 12:16means one of two things. One, Jack had
378. 12:19his own channel called the Third Eye
379. 12:20Network that was performing well, and he
380. 12:22edited the analytics page with a
381. 12:24different profile photo and channel name
382. 12:27to make it look like an unknown channel
383. 12:29had blown up. Or two, Third Eye Network
384. 12:31used to be called Sue Way, and then at
385. 12:34one point it started uploading police
386. 12:36body cam videos, so they might have
387. 12:38rebranded themselves to be called Third
388. 12:40Eye Network. The only way to verify the
389. 12:42latter is to go online and look to see
390. 12:45if the channel Third Eye Network ever
391. 12:47changed its name. Unfortunately, I
392. 12:49couldn't find any evidence of this even
393. 12:51using the Wayback Machine. The only
394. 12:52evidence of a Third Eye Network channel
395. 12:54that I could find on the Wayback Machine
396. 12:56was one that was active before the Third
397. 12:58Eye Network that I found was even
398. 13:00created. And there was zero evidence I
399. 13:02could find of this Sue Way channel being
400. 13:04active in the time displayed during the
401. 13:06testimonial video, which was September
402. 13:08to December of 2024. So, I can't really
403. 13:11point to either of those two theories
404. 13:13being true or false. What I can
405. 13:15confidently say though is this. One red
406. 13:17flag can be a discrepancy. Two red flags
407. 13:20can just be a coincidence. But this is
408. 13:22like four or five red flags that I was
409. 13:24able to find with his coaching course
410. 13:26and his 24-hour AI video. Now, I cannot
411. 13:29say I have concrete evidence that Jack
412. 13:31is scamming people. There just isn't.
413. 13:33What I can confidently say though is
414. 13:35that I personally will not be touching
415. 13:37his coaching course with a 10-ft pole.
416. 13:39Because even though there doesn't appear
417. 13:40to be anything concretely nefarious
418. 13:42going on around it, I know what's going
419. 13:44to happen. He's going to have me just
420. 13:46either rip off other people's content or
421. 13:48make AI garbage. Y'all can do what you
422. 13:50want with the info I gave you. I want
423. 13:51you to keep all of this in mind that was
424. 13:53we continue to break down his AI channel
425. 13:55video. I know, I'm sorry this is a long
426. 13:56interjection, but I had to do it because
427. 13:58I didn't uncover this in my initial
428. 14:00investigation. Let's get back on track
429. 14:02though. Remember the title of the video.
430. 14:04I blew up a channel in 24 hours using
431. 14:07AI. Well, we're about to pass the 24th
432. 14:10hour, folks.
433. 14:12At some point in the video, we reached
434. 14:14the 27th hour. And he claimed he blew up
435. 14:16the channel in 24 hours, so did he do
436. 14:19it? As you can see,
437. 14:21>> it's slowing down, which wasn't
438. 14:23expected.
439. 14:24>> Hour 27, the channel has not blown up.
440. 14:26Don't get me wrong, the video did very
441. 14:28well as a first upload. But by
442. 14:30definition of the experiment, he failed.
443. 14:32The title is literally lying to you.
444. 14:34>> YouTube can be an emotional roller
445. 14:36coaster.
446. 14:37>> Also, dude, hold on. Emotional roller
447. 14:38coaster? What are you talking about? You
448. 14:40got 20,000 views. You know how many
449. 14:42things creators would do to have their
450. 14:45shorts get 20,000 views? And I will say,
451. 14:47it's super weird that his short had no
452. 14:50comments when it had 14,000 views.
453. 14:53>> also reached 30 subscribers now, but
454. 14:55still no comments, which
455. 14:56>> Most of my shorts only get about a
456. 14:57thousand views each and they usually get
457. 14:59a few comments on them. I'd say like 70
458. 15:01to 80% of the time. Now, I don't have
459. 15:03any proof of anything shady going on
460. 15:05behind the scenes. That's not what I'm
461. 15:06saying here. It's just strange. But if
462. 15:08it didn't take 24 hours for his YouTube
463. 15:10short to go viral, how long did it take?
464. 15:13>> After flatlining for a while, we got
465. 15:15pushed very aggressively.
466. 15:16>> 36 hours. It took him 36 hours to blow
467. 15:19the video up. Why not just say that in
468. 15:21the title? And the channel didn't even
469. 15:23really blow up anyways. Yeah, the video
470. 15:26blew up and got a ton of views, but his
471. 15:27channel only got 700 subscribers. Yes,
472. 15:29that's crazy for one upload, but I mean,
473. 15:32I basically have that on my channel
474. 15:34right now. Like sure, he made this video
475. 15:36go viral, but he didn't necessarily blow
476. 15:38up a channel because to blow up a
477. 15:40channel, you actually have to build
478. 15:42something. But it's the end of the video
479. 15:44that really sat with me and messed with
480. 15:46my head.
481. 15:47>> YouTube did introduce a policy called
482. 15:49inauthentic content, which does target
483. 15:51AI content, but not the content that we
484. 15:54have created here today.
485. 15:55>> What he's saying here makes no sense.
486. 15:58And I'm not saying that because I don't
487. 15:59think he knows what he's talking about.
488. 16:01Clearly he does. His videos have
489. 16:03millions of views and he has, you know,
490. 16:05200,000 subscribers. He's good at
491. 16:07structuring videos and knowing what kind
492. 16:09of content will work. The reason I'm
493. 16:11saying it makes no sense because
494. 16:13YouTube's AI policy is not being clear
495. 16:15enough at all. Like when I read
496. 16:17inauthentic content, that literally
497. 16:19describes AI content on YouTube domain.
498. 16:21Especially how he made the video and was
499. 16:23trying to pass it off as real. Remember
500. 16:25when he was setting up his settings? He
501. 16:26didn't click off the box that said the
502. 16:28video was or wasn't AI. There's a reason
503. 16:30for that. He was trying to pass it off
504. 16:32to YouTube like it was real content.
505. 16:34It's a big problem with creators making
506. 16:37AI channels. They are not transparent
507. 16:39most of the time that their content is
508. 16:42AI.
509. 16:42>> What they specifically don't monetize is
510. 16:44one, content that has minimal variation
511. 16:46across uploads, or two, content that is
512. 16:49easily replicable at scale. As you've
513. 16:51seen today, the process that we follow
514. 16:53is very manual and there is a large
515. 16:55human element involved.
516. 16:57>> But how does it not fall under that? I
517. 16:59understand there is some sort of manual
518. 17:01human process to what he made, but
519. 17:03doesn't there have to be with AI? Like
520. 17:06you still have to have a human inputting
521. 17:08stuff into a computer. But YouTube isn't
522. 17:10talking about the ideation and
523. 17:12brainstorming part of the video. It's
524. 17:14talking about the video itself. And
525. 17:16isn't this content replicable by scale?
526. 17:19I mean, he literally made two
527. 17:20high-quality YouTube Shorts for a brand
528. 17:23new channel in under 48 hours. And now
529. 17:26that he has a formula that works, he can
530. 17:27do it even quicker. What can we take
531. 17:29away from this investigation? There's no
532. 17:30concrete proof that Jack is a scammer or
533. 17:33a liar. However, something is not lining
534. 17:35up with his image of being this perfect
535. 17:38YouTube genius. If he was really so
536. 17:40smart at YouTube, why does he only have
537. 17:41240,000 subscribers? Why is he not the
538. 17:44biggest YouTube channel, bigger than Mr.
539. 17:46Beast? And why is it that every single
540. 17:48person that tries to recreate his
541. 17:49Shorts,
542. 17:50>> [music]
543. 17:50>> even when they do the same exact thing
544. 17:52he does, fail? I have two theories.
545. 17:54First, he could just be capitalizing off
546. 17:56of AI trends and using the likeness of
547. 17:58other things to manipulate the way
548. 18:00YouTube Shorts works. His initial
549. 18:01successful viral [music] channel,
550. 18:03Nutmeg, uploaded soccer content. So,
551. 18:05because people were sticking around to
552. 18:07look at, you know, Mbappé or Messi,
553. 18:09which were soccer players they were
554. 18:11familiar with, YouTube was recognizing
555. 18:13that as an engaged view. The algorithm
556. 18:15was probably pushing it. My second
557. 18:17theory, though, is a little bit more
558. 18:18outlandish. It's possible that Jack has
559. 18:20found an exploit in the YouTube
560. 18:22algorithm that allows him to guarantee
561. 18:25the viral success of a YouTube Short.
562. 18:27Remember, his coaching course specifies
563. 18:30that he's going to give you a channel
564. 18:31that he personally pre-set up. So, it
565. 18:34could be, this is just a theory, that he
566. 18:36has found an exploit that allows him to
567. 18:38create a channel that's basically
568. 18:39guaranteed to go viral. We don't know
569. 18:41what he does to set up these channels
570. 18:43behind the scenes, so we'll never know
571. 18:45and we'll never be able to prove that
572. 18:46theory correct. Y'all, the reason I make
573. 18:48videos like this about YouTube gurus is
574. 18:50not to be negative or not to attack
575. 18:51other creators personally. It's to make
576. 18:53a point that you should do your research
577. 18:56before you give these people your money.
578. 18:58Because as somebody who has experienced
579. 18:5920 years of YouTube and put in a ton of
580. 19:02work onto the platform, I can promise
581. 19:04you, nobody on the planet Earth has a
582. 19:06100% guaranteed method to go viral on
583. 19:10YouTube in a way that doesn't violate
584. 19:13their terms of service and community
585. 19:14guidelines. YouTube as a platform just
586. 19:16does not work that way. Not every
587. 19:19YouTube channel is going to go viral.
588. 19:21So, if you took something away from this
589. 19:22video, go ahead and click the related
590. 19:24video on screen right audit the origins
591. 19:27of three random YouTube growth channels.
592. 19:29Cuz if you like today's content, I think
593. 19:31you'll like that one.
594. 19:33>> [snorts]