[comex]

The NYTimes article on yanny/laurel [1] was quite good, though: it included a tool with a slider that applied a pitch shift and frequency gain to the sound clip in order to bias it towards either "yanny" or "laurel". This let people hear both words even if their brain could only hear one of the interpretations of the original clip, and it was interesting to experiment with how much shift was needed to make it cross over. (Personally, I beat them to it :) – when I first heard of the clip, I uploaded a quick YouTube video for some people that just pitch shifted the original up and down, which is enough to make the interpretation cross over. But the interactive slider is better.) There was also a spectrogram visualization. Besides that, the main article had a thorough explanation of the origins of the clip, quotes from several different researchers about how the illusion worked, and other bits of relevant context. All in all, I'd call it high-quality reporting, and I don't see any problem with it ranking high on Google.

[1] https://www.nytimes.com/2018/05/15/science/yanny-laurel.html