Veritasium: this equation will change how you see the world, a John Gribbin plagiarism?

If you are going to use the same examples as someone else word for word in your video, you might want to give some credit.

[timothygerke]

To me, Derek's niche with his Veritasium channel is not that he is a science originator but a science communicator. With that said, if he gained his inspiration for the video from Gribbon's work, it would have been ethical to give Gribbon credit and point viewers to Gribbon's work.

[danielbautz]

Hello there.
My thoughts (a German student) about Veritasium's video are a bit ambivalent.

On the one hand I have to say that without his Video I surely would not have known the chaos theorie and the way he showed the example (even if they are not his) helped me for a better understanding.

On the other hand he didnt even put credits or a link in the describtion. In science it is normal that you use foreign works to work with but you have to mention it. And in this case he cleary copied the content and structure without a shoutout and that is right.

Anyway, I am very thankful for seeing Veritasiums video because it showed another fascinating aspect of mathematician. And as well I'm very thankful that I saw your video and that you showed me the source.
I am thinking about buying the book and read it.

Greetings from Germany :D

[christiansitzman]

I haven't read this book *yet*, so my opinion is not as informed as I would like, but they are discussing the same mathematical principles. The fact that the shorter explanation contains the same examples and elements as the longer one is not only not evidence of plagiarism, it is an obvious consequence of using scientific studies to explain an observable phenomenon. We all stand on the shoulders of giants. Both creations are resultant from the efforts of innumerable minds working in conjecture and building upon each others ideas.

[DynestiGTI]

I've noticed it with a lot of Veritasium's videos, it's just regurgitated stuff from other books/videos from years ago. I don't mind revisiting old topics, but he should provide credit to his sources.

[lfrncin]

He seems to have cited all of the information he used for that video in the description box though, i’m not sure why he would skip over this book if he used it when he referenced everything else. it does seem odd though, maybe he read deep simplicity and the went straight to the citations that it gave and read and cited those, i’m not sure. definitely seems like a book worth picking up though

[j.avocado]

Many of the examples he used are actually in the James Glieck's book he mentioned so there may be some overlap because it's all on the same subject, perhaps? But I haven't read Gribbins, just a thought

[youmaycallmeken]

You're talking about a 2004 book. Veritasium Lists its sources and they are from 2000, 1976, 1984, 1998, 2012, 1992, 1987, 1990, 2016, and 1982. So now did you check whether the book you mentioned teaches stuff from previously published materials and ever has groups of words and examples that are quite identical?

[amdistant]

I understand your frustration because I just finished reading a book called The Infinite Game by Sinek who has taken the central thesis of the argument from another author called James P. Carse who wrote a book called Finite and Infinite Games. While he does give credit to Carse, what was the point of him writing the book, why didn't he just refer everyone to the original book ?? Because they're all there to fill their own pockets as deep as they can and in Sinek's case, to try to make himself look smarter than he really is.

[miguelarodz]

Thank you for sharing, one positive bifurcation from Veritasium's video is that it brought me to this video and therefore this book. I am putting it on my wishlist to read. I just wish that he gave credit to the author so possibly more people would by his book.

[Hakuna_Matata]

I think it's not plagiarism, Veritasium is a YouTuber educator and what he does is to pass information and knowledge. Although he didn't say where he get the idea he also didn't take the credit for himself which if he does that's the time plagiarism will be an issue..

[SmokeyDope]

Very good response video! You made great points for your case and i cant help but agree with you, it seems likely that Veritasium did take elements from John Gribbins book without mentioning him.
As to the extent of plagiarism, im not so sure as its kinda a subjective judgement as to what is and isn't direct plagiarism unless its a literal copy paste scenario. There is some argument that while he (he as in Veriasium/Derick) took 'heavy' inspiration from the examples and diagrams of Deep Simplicity, he didn't copy word for word from the book, he showed the examples in a different chronology from the book, and presented the material in a new format (with animations and real time graph generation, something a book cannot do). Also, among all the examples its not like John Gribbin himself was responsible for the discovery of anything talked about in the video. So effectively, Derick took the examples and talking points of the book, mixed them in a different order, and presented them in a similar but not exact way while adding bits of visuals.
We also for fairness sake should play devils advocate for a moment, there is a small chance that Derick found all these examples and diagrams through academic research into the same published papers that Gribbins used as reference for his book, and because there's only so many ways to skin a cat (or introduce a general audience to the concept of complexity) they both chose the most simple to understand examples, arriving at similar presentations independently. I doubt that's the case, but its always worth considering. So im not entirely sold that its true plagiarism as there is some debate, however i definitely see your POV on the matter.
Personally, im happy the video got made in the first place and rose awareness in the general public for complexity, fractals, the M-set and inherent unpredictability in stable systems. for every one person like you or me who has already known about this stuff for years and sees the video as mediocre and skin-deep, there's a million fresh and curious inexperienced minds who got introduced to the beautiful world of complexity and chaos and blown away via the same video. If Derick did plagiarise from Gribbins, then thats a dick move on his part and i lose some respect for him as a person, however its always a good idea to separate creation from creator, the video itself is well made IMHO.

[tbzypgu]

some brazilian channels copy "allmost" contents from outside countries and sometimes they not put copyright, plagiarism.

[falklumo]

I hate it to be that person, but you are wrong. Right, there is a lot of plagiarism on YT. But this Veritasium video is no example. All examples you mention are the classical textbook examples you now find all over the place for Chaos theory, rabbits and convection roles included ;) Note that original credit goes back into the 70s and before. "Deep Simplicity: Bringing Order to Chaos and Complexity" is itself drawing from the material of others.

[avrywilson]

Fascinating. Thanks for your video. Incidentally, my favorite of Gribbon is 'The Scientists'. Veritasium (Derek Muller) does have *some good content, but I have many reservations over the mass majority of them. Between obvious click bait and pushing his dissertation agenda (it was on a 'best' way to teach science) I find it disturbing.

[Riochart]

How else would you like for him to explain/show the biforcation diagram, or when you said he plagiarised the equation, how else is he suposed to explain it? He just wanted to bring this topic to the mainstream public eye and i think he has done it beautifully and there is almost nothing wrong with that. In this life everything is a copy of a copy, everything has been said and if in the book it was explained in an excellent way, why shouldnt he show this to the wider audience? But i do agree on one, if he didnt quote the book nor the author he should have done that if that was his source of inspiration.
But i dont think people should be so critical and so mean as i can see in the comments. He is a succesful guy and he is pretty good at what he does. The production quality is amazing

[pokemonfan]

Thank you for this video! This was one of the videos that got me into Veritasium, so I am always happy to find criticism of my favorites; as an educator of MS and HS students (social sciences, history, English, humanities, etc.), it helps keep me humble and honest! I am having fun checking out your other videos too.

I don't know if you saw Veritasium's latest video on clickbait, but I highly recommend you watch it. He totally gives away the game when he describes the reasons, motivations and ways that he makes content and packaging, ever so slightly bemoaning the necessity of clickbait, justifying video profitablity behind the utilitarian's argument for education of the masses and for the broadest reach/engagement as follows: more views = more engaged eyes (and more money which can be used to do more education material) but is lost to the point you emphasized in your peter thiel video that every person in a growth-based system seeks a worldview/justification for their continued growth. Veritasium has a sneaky trap of ends justify any means should plagiarism be an accusation put his way of "oh well I'm just repackaging this content to reach the maximum amount of people".

Anyways, as I find your perspective illuminating and helpful in my own self-reflections, I'm curious about your opinion on the following: as a private school teacher myself, I feel I face a similar problem and pressure of plagiarism in that it is my job to teach many multiple skills/concepts in accessable and relatable ways. The teacher ethos I was taught in grad school and by my public school colleagues is a necessary Robin Hood style "take everything and repurpose it" and one should rarely "remake the wheel". Is that model of American public education privy to the same (proper, I should emphasize) criticisms and standards of plagiarism and intellectual integrity if transfered to a private system, or to extend it further, to a decentralized person-centered consumer style education that creates demand for "Education YouTubers"? Or is there a kind of pass we give to educators no matter the amount of money they are paid? I am very interested in hearing your thoughts on this and discussing it further if you are interested! Cheers and thank you again for the video!

[biology]

Yes! I totally agree with your sentiment and feel the same way.
I'm not a math/physic person though, so hadn't noticed it with this vid. But his most recent one on expert is straight-up David Epstein's book, Range.
I also don't know if it's plagiarism, but it's sure not kosher from my point of view, especially, as you say, he is profiting from these videos without referencing or acknowledging the source material. They're presented as his way of communicating the information, and receives ++ accolades for it, when it was someone else's hard work that has been minimally paraphrased.

[lalalanidani]

Veritasium never claimed to make these ideas himself, that is. I’d read this book before that video was ever a thought. Still a good video! Good points, however. There’s a fine line.

[Ones_Complement]

I don't believe in IP as a legal construct, but on a personal level if he lifted so much directly from the work the least he could've done was plug it in the video. Pretty lame.

[sliderule]

I do not share you assertion of plagiarism at all. Inappropriate here. Have you researched where the material came from in Gribbin's book? John Gibbin is a science writer. Veritasium is a YouTube science teacher. They both do similar work but in different media. However, thanks for introducing me to Gribbin's book. Just ordered it. YouTube is a wonderful platform to learn about many things.