Glide CMS image
Glide CMS arrow
The powerful intuitive headless CMS for busy content and editorial teams, bursting with features and sector insight. MACH architecture gives you business freedom.
Glide Go image
Glide Go arrow
Enterprise power at start-up speed. Glide Go is a pre-configured deployment of Glide CMS with hosting and front-end problems solved.
Glide Nexa image
Glide Nexa arrow
Audience authentication, entitlements, and preference management in one system designed for publishers and content businesses.
For your sector
Media & Entertainment
Built for any content to thrive, whoever it's for. Get your content out faster and do more with it.
Sports & Gaming
Bring fans closer to their passions and deliver unrivalled audience experiences wherever they are.
Tailored to the unique needs of publishing so you can fully focus on audiences and content success.
For your role
Unlock resources and budget with low-code & no-code solutions to do so much more.
Editorial & Content
Make content of higher quality quicker, and target it with pinpoint accuracy at the right audiences.
MACH architecture lets you kickstart development, leveraging vast native functionality and top-tier support.
Commercial & Marketing
Speedrun ideas into products, accelerate ROI, convert interest, and own the conversation.
Technology Partners
AWS image
Getty Images image
Getty Images
Brightcove image
Poool image
Solution Partners
Endava image
The App Lab image
The App Lab
Code Store image
Code Store
Polemic Digital image
Polemic Digital
Developer Experience
Find out more how to work with Glide headless CMS, Glide Go, and Glide Nexa identity management
Customer Support
Learn more about unrivalled customer support from team Glide
User and Technical documentation for the Glide Publishing Platform, Glide Go, and Glide Nexa
News arrow
Comment arrow
Newsletter arrow

Whose recommended content is it anyway?

A successful recommended content strategy can be priceless for publishers, yet getting it wrong can be a real turn off.

by  Rob Corbidge
15:09, 24 August 2023
A restaurant menu on a paper sheet. crossed out items. ((blue background)), high detail, 8 k, bright, airy, clean, clean lines,

Around eight months ago I noticed some content dissatisfaction had crept into my media consumption world. This information is of little consequence unless you are me of course, yet the cause of the dissatisfaction was a misstep by YouTube - arguably the masters of content recommendation - which only goes to show that anyone can get it wrong.

What is interesting about the cause of this dissatisfaction was that recommended content was at the root of it. 

Getting recommended content right is hugely important for many publishers. The chimera of "personalisation" was all abuzz in the industry for some time, and remains an aim for some. A good recommendation can set a reader, viewer or customer off on a mutually beneficial additional journey within the bounds of your content. They'll be satisfied and so will you. 

Just to clarify, here 'personalisation' has become the general term for, well, content that seems like what you will want to see based on what you watched before - NOT 'true' personsliation of knowing who you actually are.

Anyway, it seems that in the push of of a new YouTube video format, Shorts - a TikTok-style video snack versus its more common long videos - YouTube started to recommend trash to me. 

There's a whole content hive out there producing video material of highly questionable quality, and suddenly YouTube thought I would be interested in it. Equally, it started to recommend content outside of my interest areas, videos with very few views.  

What part of recommending low viewer count content outside the viewer's areas of interest sounds like a good idea? Foremost, it's a really bad idea for the content creators, who will rely on Click Through Rates to rise up the recommendation algorithm.

The only reason to think Shorts were responsible is that they appeared on the homepage at the time things started to go askew for users. However it's a reasonable assumption given the way Big Tech responds to threats - in this case TikTok - by simply attempting to mimic the threat and going all out on it. As a premium subscriber who views most YouTube content on a widescreen TV, maybe I'm not the representative YouTube content consumer.

There sits an issue for almost all platforms. As they've increasingly tried to be all things to all people, and the novelty of the sheer amount of content available through them starts to become stale, is a stratification such as we saw naturally in old media likely to occur? 

To use a menu analogy, the current situation is one where fine wines and single malts are presented on the menu along with Mad Dog 20/20 and supermarket cider as being of equal value, when objectively they are not. 

I'm a content consumer who likes properly researched history, technically revealing engineering explanations and competitive mountain biking vlogs. I do not wish AI-narrated nonsense about Russian super weapons to even cross my gaze.

It is possible of course to set notifications for particular channels, or look at the Latest section to see what's new from the channels you know and like. Yet that destroys a vital aspect of digital media - discoverability. Correctly recommended content can lead to a good place.

The other aspect of this is that YouTube can afford to make a mistake. It wouldn't be a proper piece about a Big Tech platform without the statutory rant about distribution control and of course in this case YouTube is an advertising business that controls the content distribution channel, with no serious rival - it has the room to make mistakes that few actual publishers enjoy.

Who knows, maybe the revenue from Shorts more than makes up for lowering the IQ of people's feed by some magnitude.

Now, here a pause is required. When thinking about publishing, we have to take our own content consumption behaviour into account. 

But equally, everyone's experience is different, so the danger comes from some talking head - in this case, me - assuming that what they are seeing is indicative of something broader or a widely-shared reality. Checks are required before any assumption can be made.

Yet it's a fact that the issue is becoming noticed more broadly: here is one such video of a number which are gaining traction lately. Video content not by us etc.

What do you think?

Latest articles

article listing image
The inside story of the runaway elephant in the room
arrow button
article listing image
How a picture of gold can seem worth more than the gold itself
arrow button
article listing image
Universal findings can cause local problems
arrow button

Ready to get started?

No matter where you are on your CMS journey, we're here to help. Want more info or to see Glide Publishing Platform in action? We got you.

Book a demo