I think that the claim you quoted is actually the less interesting claim in the article, the more interesting one is this: > ...It’s equally — depending on a u

I think that the claim you quoted is actually the less interesting claim in the article, the more interesting one is this: > ...It’s equally — depending on a user’s behavior — likely that you could have started on a more extreme video and actually moved in the other direction. > That’s what our research showed when we were looking at this more closely.. Now this is also a bit of a weasely claim. First because of "depending on user's behaviour" which isn't very clear (but for now I'll give the benefit of the doubt and assume they are trying to say "unless the user is actively seeking radical content"). Second because this claim could be true and YT would still be radicalizing (i.e. it could go 1->3, 3->2, 2->4, 4->3, 3->5, 5->4 in terms of extremeism giving a gradual slope towards radical while still maintaing that you are equally likely to navigate to more extreme content as you are to navigate to less extreme content). OTOH, if I understand the article you linked to correctly, all it says it that if you keep clicking "Up Next" you'll eventually get from mainstream content to extreme content, which doesn't invalidate the above YT claim if their research shows that users aren't actually doing that. Given that you assisted with that research maybe you could make it more clear what you tested and how it shows the "rabbit hole" effect?