The Truth About Navalny’s YouTube Statistics

These statistics were not provided by Kremlin hackers or spies from the YouTube administration. It is regularly published by Anti-corruption Foundation employees themselves.

Here, for example, is what you can find on the Twitter Account of Navalny‘s press secretary Kira Yarmysh:

This are the statistics of the views of the last video. The one that exposes the mythical Putin’s Palace.

The numbers are really impressive. It is an absolute record for Russian YouTube. However, here I was interested in this strange circumstance.

The video lasts almost 2 hours. At the same time, for 50 million views, it scored only 17.4 million hours of total viewing time.

I write “total” because if we divide 17.4 million hours into 50 million views, we will make sure that the average viewing time of the video will be about 20 minutes.

Let me remind you, the total duration of the video is 1 hour and 52 minutes. I.e., the average person watches only 18% of Navalny’s video. The rest is skipped.

At the same time, being a YouTube blogger (in the past) I can say that the average time spent watching the video is like the average salary in the country, where the boss gets a million, and 30 employees – the minimum wage. On average, it turns out quite well.

Here also. For every person who watched the video to the end, there are 10-20 people who watched only the first 10 minutes.

In other words, out of a total of 50 million views, barely more than 1 million were fully viewed from start to finish. And I’m being generous here.

No, I’m not saying that the other 49 million are fake bots. Just, excuse me, because the video with the investigation is not an entertainment video with kittens and stupid falls. It is a single narrative, a single object, stitched together by a continuous thread of conclusions that follow each other.

You can’t just watch 18% of the video and understand everything. It’s like a math course – miss one lesson, and then nothing is clear. It’s the same here. If you haven’t watched the video in full, you can’t claim that “Navalny proved it!” or “Now I know the truth!”.

Here I, for example, watched the video in full, from beginning to end. Plus, I read the entire text version and clicked on most of the links. So, regardless of my conclusions on the content, I can say – it was a hell of a job. There are a lot of numbers there. In the end, my head just goes round (and I, like, am not quite stupid – a silver medal and a red university diploma).

Therefore, I very much doubt that out of the 1 million who watched to the end, at least 100,000 really understood and analysed.

How do most people do it? They just look at it mechanically, without particularly subjecting the information to internal criticism. Or in general -they start playback of the video, and they themselves go about their business (just to help promote the video).

In short, 100,000 people is the maximum number of people who have looked completely and understood. From these, I am sure, there are many foreign views (from Ukraine, especially), as well as views of people like me, who look only to be surprised by the next delusions of a Berlin patient.

I think that the real opposition Russians out of these 100,000 – at most half. I.e., 0.1% of all views.

What follows from this?

From this it follows that 99.9% of those who are now yelling at the entire Internet didn’t really look at, or understand, anything. But they don’t need to. After all, they were clearly told that “Navalny proved everything!”, and therefore it is not necessary to think with your own head.

“Don’t think, just spread it,” is the famous slogan of Navalny himself. And it, as we can see, works perfectly.


Many will say: “well, you didn’t prove anything here either. All of this is just your speculation – ‘I think, I think, I think…’.”

I totally agree! But my words are based on at least some statistics and common sense. If you look closely at the Navalny investigation, you will not find any “evidence” of Putin’s involvement, except for two things:

  • The sponsors of the construction of the palace are familiar with Putin;
  • The palace is guarded by the FSB.

That’s it! Can you imagine? That’s really all. Based on this, Navalny concludes:

“Well, who else can the FSB protect? Of course, Putin!”

An interesting conclusion. And why not Medvedev? Not Sechin? Not Miller? Not some kind of Chubais? After all, you yourself say that everyone is there at the same time, everyone is friends there. So why can’t the FSB protect anyone other than Putin?

This whole investigation is pure manipulation and speculation. Against their background, my “mini-investigation” looks like a model of logic. Although I do not claim to be the ultimate truth…

Obyasnyu na paltsakh

Copyright © 2022. All Rights Reserved.