Asger Risom
More than one in five videos shown to first-time YouTube users are AI-generated “slop,” with a further third classified as “brainrot.”
For years, YouTube’s recommendation engine has been accused of rewarding outrage, excess, and repetition. New research suggests it may now be optimising for something even more corrosive: vast quantities of low-quality, AI-generated video.
According to a new analysis from video platform Kapwing, more than one in five videos shown to first-time YouTube users are AI-generated “slop,” with a further third classified as “brainrot.”
Combined, that means over half of a clean YouTube Shorts feed may consist of content designed primarily to capture attention rather than provide information, entertainment, or creative value.
What new users actually see
To understand the scale of the issue, Kapwing created a brand-new YouTube account with no watch history and analysed the first 500 Shorts served by the platform.
Of those videos, 104 were identified as AI-generated slop, while 165 fell into the broader category of brainrot. Fewer than half were judged to be relatively natural, human-made content.
This matters because early exposure plays an outsized role in shaping how users interact with platforms. If YouTube’s first impression is dominated by automated, repetitive videos, that environment becomes self-reinforcing, influencing both viewer expectations and creator incentives.
What counts as “AI slop”
Kapwing defines AI slop as low-effort, automatically generated video content distributed at scale to farm views, subscribers, or influence. These videos typically rely on synthetic narration, recycled visual templates, exaggerated scenarios, and sensational pacing.
Brainrot overlaps heavily, but pushes further into compulsive viewing, offering little narrative coherence beyond the urge to keep scrolling.
Unlike traditional spam, this content often looks polished at a glance. That superficial plausibility makes it harder for viewers to consciously disengage.
Algorithm or oversupply?
Whether YouTube’s algorithm actively promotes this material or simply responds to its overwhelming volume is unclear.
What is clear is that AI has reduced the cost of video creation to near zero, allowing slop to compete directly with human-made work for attention.
The result is a platform increasingly shaped by automation. YouTube now faces a defining question: should it remain neutral toward what succeeds algorithmically, or intervene to preserve the conditions for meaningful creation?
Sources: Kapwing AI Slop Report; YouTube Shorts analysis; The Guardian.
