The Fujiwhara Effect on YouTube: AI, Shorts, and Duplicate Content

News
August 8, 2025

The Fujiwhara Effect on YouTube: The Surge of AI, Shorts, and Duplicate Content

A few months ago, Danny Goodwin, editorial director at Search Engine Land and SMX, raised an intriguing observation regarding YouTube.

He wasn’t pointing fingers at content theft or calling out clickbait. Instead, he noticed something peculiar: content creators were uploading the same video multiple times, albeit with slightly different titles or thumbnails.

A Thought-Provoking Question

“Is this a strategy? Or will YouTube penalize it as duplicate content?” Goodwin asked—a deceptively simple but profound question. As I investigated further, it became evident that what he noticed wasn’t merely a YouTube trick or a result of content farms.

It was the visible indicator of a larger phenomenon at play.

The Meteorological Analogy

To put it in meteorological terms, what we’re witnessing is akin to a Fujiwhara effect. This occurs when two cyclonic storms interact, rotating around a common axis and sometimes merging into a superstorm. On YouTube, the two storms in question are:

The explosive rise of YouTube Shorts.
The swift advancement of AI video generation.

The Collision of Storms

What follows is an in-depth look at how these storms converged—from an algorithm update that ignited a duplication surge to a policy change in July aimed at mitigating it. Plus, we’ll explore what creators need to do to avoid being washed away in this evolving landscape.

Storm 1: Hurricane Shorts

The first wave began forming back in September 2020, when YouTube launched Shorts in India as a strategic response to TikTok’s ban. Initially, it was just a small feature, focusing on vertical videos under 60 seconds. However, it quickly gained momentum.

Fast forward to 2025, and Shorts has transformed into the dominant format on YouTube. They now generate over 70 billion daily views, according to YouTube for Press. And the stats speak volumes:

59.4% of YouTube uploads in the last 90 days have been Shorts.
These videos have accounted for 87.7% of all views and 81.8% of engagements.

Shorts are not only mobile-friendly and simple to create—they’re also inherently viral. It’s the perfect gateway for creators, but it also opens the doors for impersonators. You no longer need a film crew to produce Shorts; a good AI video tool and a few prompts will do the trick.

Storm 2: Hurricane Sora

Enter Sora, OpenAI’s generative video model capable of creating photorealistic motion from text. When demo clips of Sora emerged—showing breathtaking images of wild horses and scenes from a rainy Tokyo—people started taking notice.

Alongside Sora, a torrent of creator-centric tools flooded the market:

InVideo AI: Fast and template-oriented.
2Short AI: Specifically designed for cranking out Shorts.
Quso.ai, Veed.io, MakeShorts: Each offering its unique spin on short-form video automation.

These tools promised both scalability and speed—and they delivered. One popular video on InVideo’s channel boasted: “I made 60 YouTube Shorts in 60 mins with just 2 AI tools”— garnering over 2.1 million views and twice the average engagement rate.

The appeal was evident: AI empowers any creator to churn out dozens, if not hundreds, of Shorts weekly. The catch? They all began to appear strikingly similar.

The Fujiwhara Effect: March 31 to July 15

The pivotal moment when these two storms collided was March 31. On that day, YouTube made a crucial adjustment to how views are counted on Shorts. Previously, views were logged only after a user had engaged with the video for a few seconds; after March 31, views were counted the instant a Short started playing.

This shift had monumental implications. A looped 6-second video designed for autoplay could suddenly accumulate thousands of views—regardless of whether someone actually watched it completely. Coupled with AI’s capacity for mass video production, the Fujiwhara effect led to widespread duplication, instant views, and rapid monetization.

Content creators and farms were quick to seize this opportunity.

July 15: The Eye of the Policy Storm

By mid-summer, YouTube had its fill. On July 15, the YouTube Partner Program (YPP) made a seemingly minor update regarding channel monetization policies. They clarified that their “repetitious content” policy now covered inauthentic content.

This wasn’t an entirely new rule; however, it was a clear signal that YouTube acknowledged how the Fujiwhara effect allowed the two storms to converge, twist, and escalate in intensity.

Sarah from TeamYouTube addressed creators’ concerns about the updated policies, clarifying that:

This isn’t a new stance, spammy or low-effort content has always been barred from monetization.
AI usage is permissible, as long as creators inject originality, character, or creativity.
Token variations in video content won’t suffice.

She provided examples of what is deemed inauthentic content:

Videos that include readings from content created by others, such as news articles.
Music tracks simply altered by pitch or speed, with no original touches.
Overly repetitive videos lacking educational, commentary, or storytelling elements.
Large numbers of videos following the same format or template.
Slideshows or scrolling text with minimal narration, commentary, or informative elements.

The message was transparent: if you’re attempting to manipulate the system through template duplication, you risk losing monetization eligibility.

The Creator Backlash (and Breakdown)

The policy change struck quickly and fiercely. Faceless AI channels were sounding alarm bells everywhere. On July 13, InVideo for Content Creators released a video titled, YouTube’s New Policy Just Killed Faceless AI Channels? It garnered 25,100 views and 1,053 engagements in just three days.

Why the panic? Many of these channels were centered around automation:

AI voiceovers
Stock footage
Keyword-optimized text
Looping visuals

And suddenly, they discovered that their content despite being copyright-safe could now be flagged as “inauthentic” and demonetized.

YouTube’s editorial and creator liaison Renee Ritchie stepped in to further clarify. This shift wasn’t about extinguishing AI channels; it was about promoting content that genuinely adds value for viewers—be it through entertainment, insights, education, or personality.

What Still Works: Value-Driven Reuse and AI Creativity

Here’s the silver lining: YouTube isn’t banning AI or reused content. What’s crucial is the originality you bring.

Shorts that remix or reuse clips can still receive monetization if they display genuine originality. Consider:

Commentary and critique (like CinemaSins or LegalEagle).
Narrative overlays (telling stories through clips and original voiceovers).
Educational framing (such as sports analyses or science explainers).
Humor and creative editing (think meme-style remixes).

For instance, CinemaSins uploaded a Short in April 2024 titled, “But if you can make it past the burning sea… strangeworld”, which amassed 3 million views and 310,000 engagements, with an engagement rate 6.2 times higher than the average.

That’s what adding real value looks like and YouTube rewards it.

Your Navigation Guide: How to Survive (and Thrive)

If you’re a creator trying to navigate this swirling mix of policies and platforms, here’s how to steer your ship:

Use AI as a tool, not a crutch. AI should complement your creativity, not replace it. Use it for scripts, voiceovers, or visuals—but ensure every video carries your unique flair.
Avoid templated content. If you find yourself reusing the same structure, visuals, or voice with only minor tweaks, that’s a red flag. Interchangeable Shorts put you at risk for demonetization.
Add substance. Engage your audience with commentary, analysis, or storytelling. Even short content can be deep. The more engaging and informative your videos are, the more secure—and successful—you’ll be.
Diversify formats. Don’t limit yourself to just Shorts—combine them with long-form content or live streams. Build a multifaceted brand that minimizes single-policy risks.
Stay informed. YouTube updates its policies frequently. Keep up with TeamYouTube, join creator forums, and consistently read resources like Search Engine Land.

The Core Incentive: Views vs. Watch Time

Let’s remind ourselves what triggered all of this—the change in view-counting methods. Back in 2012, YouTube prioritized watch time over clicks, pushing creators to engage audiences with compelling content.

However, the March 2025 shift—where views count as soon as a Short starts—feels like a step backward, as it encourages quick views over quality. Until this changes, the temptation to flood the platform with inferior AI-generated content will persist.

YouTube might be playing Whac-A-Mole with bad content now, but the underlying issue runs deeper: the view-count model itself.

Final Forecast: Stay Human, Stay Original

The YouTube Fujiwhara effect isn’t going anywhere. The storms of Shorts and AI are still circling, and the challenge for creators is clear: rise above automation by embracing authenticity.

Those emphasizing substance, storytelling, and genuine value will thrive. Conversely, those who chase speed, shortcuts, and spam are likely to find themselves washed away.

In a landscape where algorithms shift and tools evolve daily, the most enduring strategy remains timeless: