The Flourishing Business of Fake YouTube Views
The Flourishing Business of Fake YouTube Views
Plays can be bought for pennies and delivered in bulk,
inflating videos’ popularity and creating an environment ripe for manipulation.
By MICHAEL H. KELLER AUG. 11, 2018
Martin Vassilev makes a good living selling fake views on
YouTube videos. Working from home in Ottawa, he has sold about 15 million views
so far this year, putting him on track to bring in more than $200,000, records
show.
Mr. Vassilev, 32, does not provide the views himself. His
website, 500Views.com, connects customers with services that offer views, likes
and dislikes generated by computers, not humans. When a supplier cannot fulfill
an order, Mr. Vassilev — like a modern switchboard operator — quickly connects
with another.
“I can deliver an unlimited amount of views to a video,”
Mr. Vassilev said in an interview. “They’ve tried to stop it for so many years,
but they can’t stop it. There’s always a way around.”
After Google, more people search on YouTube than on any
other site. It is the most popular platform among teenagers, according to a
2018 study by the Pew Research Center, beating out giants like Facebook and
Instagram. With billions of views a day, the video site helps spur global
cultural sensations, spawn careers, sell brands and promote political agendas.
Just as other social media companies have been plagued by
impostor accounts and artificial influence campaigns, YouTube has struggled
with fake views for years.
The fake-view ecosystem of which Mr. Vassilev is a part
can undermine YouTube’s credibility by manipulating the digital currency that
signals value to users. While YouTube says fake views represent just a tiny
fraction of the total, they still have a significant effect by misleading
consumers and advertisers. Drawing on dozens of interviews, sales records, and
trial purchases of fraudulent views, The Times examined how the marketplace
worked and tested YouTube’s ability to detect manipulation.
Inflating views violates YouTube’s terms of service. But
Google searches for buying views turn up hundreds of sites offering “fast” and
“easy” ways to increase a video’s count by 500, 5,000 or even five million. The
sites, offering views for just pennies each, also appear in Google search ads.
To test the sites, a Times reporter ordered thousands of
views from nine companies. Nearly all of the purchases, made for videos not
associated with the news organization, were fulfilled in about two weeks.
One of the businesses was Devumi.com. According to
company records, it collected more than $1.2 million over three years by
selling 196 million YouTube views. Nearly all the views remain today. An
analysis of those records, from 2014 to 2017, shows that most orders were
completed in weeks, though those for a million views or more took longer.
Providing large volumes cheaply and quickly is often a sign that a service is
not offering real viewership.
Devumi’s customers included an employee of RT, a media
organization funded by the Russian government, and an employee of Al Jazeera
English, another state-backed company. Other buyers were a filmmaker working
for Americans for Prosperity, a conservative political advocacy group, and the
head of video at The New York Post. (Al Jazeera and The Post said the workers
were not authorized to make such purchases and were no longer employed there.)
Multiple musicians bought views to appear more popular:
YouTube views factor into metrics from the ratings company Nielsen and song
charts including Billboard’s Hot 100.
Some companies bought views for clients under the guise
of social media promotion that would result in real people watching their
videos.
Dr. Judith Oppenheimer, 78, paid a company $5,000 to
promote a book she had self-published in hopes of securing a mainstream deal.
Her video soon had over 58,000 views, delivered through Devumi.
“There was no increase in sales and no book deal,” she
said. “Soon after I signed the contract I thought, ‘I’ll have no proof of what
they do or don’t do.’ Now it begins to make sense. They can do it in a day.”
Purveyors depend on constantly evolving tactics to
deliver views, including automated or “bot” traffic and pop-under videos on
unsuspecting users’ computers, but YouTube says it has effective processes to
defend against these approaches.
“This has been a problem we have been working on for
many, many years,” said Jennifer Flannery O’Connor, YouTube’s director of
product management. The company’s systems continuously monitor a video’s
activity, and the anti-fraud team often buys views to understand better how
these sites operate, she said. “Our anomaly detection systems are really good.”
Still, the challenges are significant. At one point in
2013, YouTube had as much traffic from bots masquerading as people as it did
from real human visitors, according to the company. Some employees feared this
would cause the fraud detection system to flip, classifying fake traffic as real
and vice versa — a prospect engineers called “the Inversion.”
“The problem itself was extraordinary,” said Blake
Livingston, a member of YouTube’s fraud and abuse team at the time who has
since left the company.
But fixes were made that relieved the fake-traffic surge,
which YouTube said resulted from an attack against the website.
Years later, the battle against fake views continues,
even as YouTube contends with disinformation campaigns, like Russia’s efforts during
the 2016 election, and language it considers hate speech, including posts by
the recently banned Infowars site.
YouTube would not disclose the number of fake views it
blocked each day, but said its teams worked to keep them to less than 1 percent
of the total. Still, with the platform registering billions of views a day,
tens of millions of fake views could be making it through daily.
“View count manipulation will be a problem as long as
views and the popularity they signal are the currency of YouTube,” Mr.
Livingston said.
Carlton E. Bynum II runs a website, GetLikes.click, from
a home office in Houston that sells YouTube views as well as Instagram and
Twitter followers, Facebook likes and SoundCloud plays.
“I can deliver an unlimited amount of views to a video,”
said Martin Vassilev, owner of 500Views.com, a website based in Ottawa.
It took Mr. Vassilev about 18 months to go from being on
welfare and living with his father in Canada to buying a white BMW 328i and a
house of his own.
By late 2014, his website was on the first page of Google
search results for buying YouTube views, fulfilling 150 to 200 orders a day and
bringing in more than $30,000 a month, he said. “I really couldn’t believe you
could make that much money online,” he said. The Times reporter’s order on his
site, for 25,000 views, was fulfilled one day later.
Mr. Vassilev declined to name his clients but said that
many orders came from public relations or marketing firms.
Today, he fills most orders through SMMKings.com, a
wholesale supplier run by Sean Tamir, 29. Mr. Tamir charges him about a dollar
for a thousand views, which Mr. Vassilev resells for $13.99, throwing in 100
free likes.
Several times a year, YouTube makes changes to its
detection system to try to disrupt fake views, Mr. Tamir said. A recent episode
came in late January, but many of the sites were functioning a few weeks later
when The Times made most of its purchases. Suppliers say they get around system
updates by making their traffic appear more humanlike, ensuring that it comes
from users with prior views, for example.
One purveyor, Carlton E. Bynum II, 24, uses advertising
to attract customers. He collected more than $191,000 in revenue this year but
spent over $109,000 in ads that appeared at the top of Google, according to
financial records. His site, GetLikes.click, run from a home office in Houston,
sells YouTube views as well as Instagram and Twitter followers, Facebook likes
and SoundCloud plays.
A spokeswoman for Google, which is owned by the same
company as YouTube, said that that sites selling views appeared in search
results because they were relevant, but that there was “room for improvement”
in warning users.
Google does not allow ads with terms like “buy YouTube
views.” But Mr. Bynum said one workaround was to misspell the words and submit
an ad multiple times if it was denied at first. When asked about advertising
for paid YouTube views, Google removed some of the ads, including Mr. Bynum’s,
but similar ones returned after two weeks.
Before Mr. Bynum sold views, he was buying them for
himself. After he was discharged from the Marine Corps last year, he began
posting product reviews on YouTube and taking a cut when visitors made
purchases using his links. The views he bought would often cause his videos to
rank higher than his competitors’ in search, he said. The effect would
snowball: His videos would gain traffic through search, and he would make more
money. (A YouTube spokeswoman said views were just one factor among many that
affected search rankings.)
“It worked great,” he said. “I can get views within a
day. I can get likes within hours.”
Mr. Bynum said he believed real people were watching his
videos. “But let’s say there’s a small chance I’m wrong and it is bots,” he
said. “Their videos are still getting ranked.”
Mr. Vassilev, who also said he used fake views to
increase the search ranking of videos promoting his website, makes no pretense
that what he is selling is authentic viewership. “It’s impossible,” he said.
“The beautiful thing about these social media platforms
is when they came out it was genuine,” said Aleem Khalid, a musician. “But now
I feel it’s all fake.”
Promised a Following
The salesman on the phone said it would be simple:
Elizabeth Clayton, a retired English and psychology professor, could pay
Hancock Press $4,200 to publicize her self-published works of poetry. The
company said online promotion, including 40,000 guaranteed YouTube views, would
translate into sales, emails show.
Ms. Clayton, 77, was optimistic. She had been publishing
for seven years but had not sold much. One royalty check came to $1.47, another
to $0.75. She signed up for Hancock to promote two videos, costing her $8,400,
records show.
“They told me if I got a certain number of hits I would
sell a certain amount,” she said.
Instead of traditional marketing, Hancock paid $270 for
55,000 views from Devumi for each video, the records show. The views eventually
reached about 60,000, where they remain. But there was no increase in sales.
“They couldn’t tell me anything about the people that were watching the video,”
Ms. Clayton said. “I suspected something, but I couldn’t get any information.”
Wayne Hancock, the 92-year-old chief executive of the
Arkansas-based company, said he believed real people were watching the videos.
That’s how Devumi marketed its views. Mr. Hancock’s daughter, K. C. Shay, who
helps run the business, dismissed Ms. Clayton’s documents and the Devumi
receipts as fakes.
But Devumi records show that Hancock Press spent about
$26,000 over three years, obtaining more than five million views for 75 or so
authors. Interviews with six other Hancock clients are consistent with Ms.
Clayton’s experience.
Devumi did not respond to repeated requests for comment.
The company, whose website says that it has closed, came under investigation in
two states in January after The Times reported that it sold fake Twitter
followers.
Many Devumi clients came from the music industry, where
buying views is common and often seen as necessary. “YouTube is one of the
premier sources of music consumption and an important indicator of musical
trends and popularity,” said Silvio Pietroluongo, a vice president at
Billboard.
As a new artist, Aleem Khalid hired Crowd Surf, a
promotion company, in 2014. Without his knowledge, he said, the firm bought
10,000 views each on three of his videos. They now have between 11,000 and
42,000 views. “The beautiful thing about these social media platforms is when
they came out it was genuine. But now I feel it’s all fake,” said Mr. Khalid,
25. (Cassie Petrey, a co-founder of Crowd Surf, said she thought Devumi was
producing real views, based on statements on its website.)
Others who relied on Devumi said they were similarly
surprised at the company’s tactics. Ami Horowitz, the conservative filmmaker,
bought 10,000 views for a video he appeared in — “What We Learned at the
People’s Climate March” — on the YouTube channel for Americans for Prosperity,
the Koch brothers’ political influence group. Mr. Horowitz, who is often a
guest on Fox News, also bought views for a video about the protests in
Ferguson, Mo.
In a statement, he said he had believed Devumi worked
like traditional web advertising. But “it wasn’t what we expected,” he said,
adding that he never used Devumi or similar services again. A spokeswoman for
Americans for Prosperity called the behavior unethical and said the group would
“not knowingly engage” in it.
Spotting the Forgeries
YouTube’s engineers, statisticians and data scientists
are constantly improving in their ability to fight what Ms. O’Connor calls a
“very hard problem,” but the attacks have “continually gotten stronger and more
sophisticated,” she said.
After the Times reporter presented YouTube with the
videos for which he had bought views, the company said sellers had exploited
two vulnerabilities that had already been fixed. Later that day, the reporter
bought more views from six of the same vendors. The view count rose again,
though more slowly. A week later, all but two of the vendors had delivered the
full amount.
Even when it looks closely, YouTube can miss videos with
fake views. A 2017 Google public report on disinformation during the 2016
election looked at RT’s YouTube channels, concluding that there was “no
evidence of manipulation of our platform or policy violations.” Yet The Times
recently found that an RT employee bought fake views for videos in 2016, which
YouTube acknowledged it did not detect.
James Brown, a correspondent for RT, had purchased 30,000
views and 300 likes across three videos that focused on problems involving
homelessness and immigration in Europe. Mr. Brown said he took Devumi at its
word that the views would be real people. An RT spokeswoman said the company
was unaware of the purchases and was conducting an internal review.
“It concerns me that while Twitter and Facebook appear to
have made some credible progress in this area, YouTube still struggles to
identify inauthentic and coordinated activity on its platform,” said Senator
Mark Warner of Virginia, the top Democrat on the Intelligence Committee.
View-selling sites continue to advertise with apparent
impunity. A post on the YouTube Creator Blog warning users against fake views
has numerous comments linking to view-selling sites.
“The only way YouTube could eliminate this is if they
removed the view counter altogether,” said Mr. Vassilev, the fake-view seller.
“But that would defeat the purpose of YouTube.”
I have read this article on NYTimes about the business of Youtube Views. Very interesting!
ReplyDelete