I might be missing something. The article headline says that Veritasium "got it all wrong", but I'm struggling to see what it is exactly that they got wrong.

I might be missing something. The article headline says that Veritasium "got it all wrong", but I'm struggling to see what it is exactly that they got wrong. There's this part: > For starters, there’s a stunning lack of anything like testing. In fact, the lack of success that led to the irate video blogger’s claims of “fraud” is largely due to a lack of proper understanding when it comes to vital components of digital marketing like testing and targeting. which is given without justification or evidence. In fact, when it ends on: > "It’s also important to note that Facebook does need to “clean up the pool” a little bit. Then implement some of the same type of fraudulent chargebacks that Google AdWords has now – which are a direct result of fraudulent clicks during the early days of paid search advertising." makes it sound like Veritasium got it exactly right. What am I missing here?