[database_lost]

"A popular YouTuber filmed himself driving a wind-powered vehicle downwind faster than the wind itself. [...] Muller, the creator of the Veritasium YouTube channel, likes to break down funky science concepts for his 9.5 million subscribers."

The "popular YouTuber" is Derek Muller, who studied Engineering Physics and has a PhD in Physics Education Research... It's so frustrating to see how the writer tried so hard to make as much as clickbait-y title as possible...

[dmurray]

Having 9.5 million subscribers on a science-based YouTube channel is definitely more notable than having gone to university, or indeed having a PhD. I think the writer picked the correct description here.

[database_lost]

I see your point, but the title and first paragraphs try to paint the picture of a "funky science" youtuber betting a UCLA physicist $10k and winning (which for me is very different to the truth: UCLA physicist bets another physicist $10k and loses)

[ehsankia]

He did study Physics but his main field is science education, I think it's fair to assume a physics professor would know a bit more. I also think it's a bit of your own preconceived notion at play here assuming that calling someone a "Youtuber" is meant as a negative. This is equivalent to saying "Science communicator vs physics professor", which is a fair portrayal.

[database_lost]

I really don't think being called a Youtuber is meant as negative. I take issue with how the writer chose to present this story. If this was about the intricacies of ad revenue on YouTube for example, great, no need to specify he also has a physics degree. But I'm disappointed to see them paint him as just a guy who "likes to break down funky science" (and made 10k off a physicist) when he is more than that, with relevance to the actual story. For someone who doesn't know his work, he might as well be one of the guys burning snow with lighters a few months ago to prove its fake snow...

[glitchc]

It's a sad indictment of the times when people feel that having a million subscribers (read: being popular) is more notable than having a PhD (read: expert training) in a relevant field.

It's no wonder anti-vaccine material is so widespread. Someone famous on Youtube said it was bad, it must be true!

[danpalmer]

Subscribers do so for a reason. In this case not insignificantly because of expert training.

I'd suggest that very few YouTubers are popular because they are popular, in fact I think this is fairly rare in general. I think it's more likely that they provide some value to their audiences. I think looking down on "celebrity culture" often fails to account for the types of value that one doesn't value themselves.

[glitchc]

Re the first statement, that’s complete horseshit. Celebrity culture is all about being part of a cult following and finding like-minded people. Any correlation to objective fact or basis in reality is purely coincidental, and has no bearing on the quality of the person or the content of the movement being followed.

I totally get that you value Gig Hadid’s opinion on wardrobe whereas I don’t, nor do I judge, to each his/her own. But, to claim that her opinion is more accurate/better/truthful to that of a respected fashion designer or industry expert is inherently flawed. Wearing clothes is not the same as designing them.

[kube-system]

I think it's just a simple matter of the relative exclusivity of those accomplishments.

If I asked you who Woodrow Wilson was, what would you respond with?

[glitchc]

That’s a false dichotomy. Being a president is tangentially related to exceptional intelligence.

A better example would be Brian May (of Queen). No correlation between academic credentials and artistic career. There, if the article were about black holes and May had an opinion, I would expect the reporter to cite his PhD, making it a (potentially) informed opinion.

[kube-system]

The people who have top YouTube channels also have exceptional intelligence. Maybe less so in logical intelligence or rote memorization, but more so in other intelligences.

> A better example would be Brian May (of Queen). No correlation between academic credentials and artistic career

I am not sure why that example is better -- Muller's academic credentials are very well related to his career. As were Wilson's.