Zen Against The Machine

Tag: systems

  • 279,339 Impressions, 151 Views — The Anatomy of an Algorithmic Misfire

    Video #21 was just another weekly video in my YouTube photography channel. Within a few days I watched in disbelief as the number of impressions reached 279,339. The algorithm was pushing my videos! My disbelief quickly turned to dismay as the click-through-rate hovered around 0%. 109 views from almost 280,000 impressions! The algorithm must be broken.

    The Spike That Made No Sense

    It made no sense. A single video, similar in structure to the 20 preceding it, yet 279,339 impression out of 290,369 impression for the entire channel. 280,000 views that drove a little over 100 views to the channel.

    I was trying to remain calm. I uploaded 20 videos, some got less than 10 views, my subscriber base hovered at 6 for months. The algorithm finally pays attention to my work and all I get is 100 views? 

    My anger quickly turned to curiosity. Something doesn’t add up. This has to be some kind of algorithmic misfire. Something is not aligned properly under the hood. Either my content is unbelievably bad (a possibility) or YouTube’s engine is sending my video to the wrong audience. 

    Time to pop the hood and take a closer look.

    Under the Bonnet

    Time to inspect everything carefully and meticulously. A full diagnosis. Even though the channel was small and new there should be enough data to provide some clear insights. 

    Here are the full stats from YouTube’s analytics; everything visible under the hood:

    Impressions279,339
    Total Views151
    Views from Impressions109
    CTR0.05%
    Average View Duration0:42
    Average Percentage Viewed30.1%

    The numbers are quite clear: massive exposure with zero conversion. The video was heavily surfaced, the algorithm was obviously targeting the wrong audience — no clicks. Let’s check out the traffic sources.

    Suggested videos51%
    YouTube Search29.8%
    Channel pages6.0%
    Other YouTube features4.6%
    Direct or unknown3.3%
    Others5.3%

    Over half of impressions came from suggested videos and not from the home feed. This probably means that the algorithm clustered my video with similar videos based on thumbnail, titles, or other reason and somehow got it wrong. Let’s dig deeper into other audience signals.

    Top geographiesNot enough data
    Age DistributionNot enough data
    Gender DistributionNot enough data
    New vs Returning viewersNot enough data
    Subscribed vs non-subscribed viewers88.7% Subscribed

    No luck. This is a new channel with very little views. There is simply not enough data. The fact that 88.7% of watch time was from subscribers reinforces what we already know but adds nothing new.

    Computer50.9%
    Mobile Phone25.2%
    TV16.4%
    Tablet7.5%

    No much information added from device type either. Let’s look at viewer engagement next.

    Viewer Retention (30 Seconds)42%
    Viewer Retention (60 Seconds)25%
    Viewer Retention (90 Seconds)23%
    Viewer Retention (120 Seconds)17%
    Viewer Retention (End of video)5%

    Viewer engagement is not stellar but it is inline with other videos. 3.5% end screen element clicks (4.4% channel average), 10 comments, 7 likes, and 0 dislikes. An underperforming video but still no explanation for the algorithmic misfire (nobody clicked).

    Last check. Let’s look at the top referring videos.

    The Wrong Crowd


    		ImpressionsCTRViewsAVD
    Chill Time Jazz Haven Pt 3538,0370%120:24
    Jazz for Life Pt 2032,0640%10:19
    Funny Jazz Pt 1219,0290%10:05
    Chill Jazz Time Pt 234,7040%——

    I think we found the problem. For some reason the algorithm thinks my photography videos look identical to chill-jazz and city-ambience videos.

    I looked at the videos, and to be honest, I could understand why a machine would make that mistake. The soundtracks were almost identical, the mood and ambience were similar. So were the pacing and the visuals. My choice of category: “Travel & Events” did not help things either. 

    Most human viewers saw the absurdity immediately; but the algorithm saw only patterns and a shared visual tone. The machine didn’t misunderstand me (or the 280,000 viewers that were recommended my video). It recognized me — just as something I wasn’t.

    Mixed Signals

    The easy conclusion is the algorithm failed. Which in many ways it did. But the signals I was sending the machine were unclear. It was a Signal to Noise ratio problem: there was not enough clear signaling on my end and the machine simply mirrored the noise.

    The algorithm was hitting the target I painted but not the target I wanted.

    I needed to improve my thumbnails, fine tune my titles, I need to communicate better with my viewers. The algorithm is not broken — I need to do better. 

    Signal Over Noise

    What I did right (Signal)

    • Title: Direct, keyword-rich, and accurately describes subject, activity, and gear.
    • Tags were all relevant and accurate. I avoided spam tags or irrelevant terms, which kept metadata clean and credible.
    • Accurate geographic tagging. Mentioned specific district and city.
    • Thumbnail Likely clean, photographic, not clickbait. Aligns with brand tone and audience expectation.
    • Early data suggests honest audience behavior
    • 88.7% of watch time from subscribers → engagement remains loyal. Retention (42% after 30s, 17% at 2m) within normal limits for short, quiet videos.

    What I did Wrong (Noise)

    • Chose the Wrong Category Set to Travel & Events. This category associates with city walks, ambience, and travel vlogs — not documentary street photography. Result: the algorithm pushed it to passive “background viewing” audiences instead of creator-interest clusters.
    • Over-repetitive Title Format. A repeated title structure made different videos appear algorithmically identical. Machine-learning models read this as a series clone, reducing semantic distinction and triggering similarity-based recommendations. Category and Title Reinforced Each Other
    • Thumbnail Too Neutral. Likely mirrored prior uploads — muted color, calm street composition. Visual similarity can further confirm “duplicate content” signals across uploads.
    • No Early Disambiguation in Description The copy doesn’t tell the viewer what type of video it is until the third line. Without a strong first-sentence keyword the algorithm groups it generically.
    • Tags Under-specified for Creative Intent. Location tags reinforce the travel angle. Mix in intent-level tags.
  • Sacrifice Perfection for Long-Term Progress

    Sacrifice Perfection for Long-Term Progress

    This is the 6th post I’ve published here on Zen Against The Machine — and the 15th I’ve written and uploaded. 

    There were 9 posts I uploaded and later deleted. They were throwaway content — and that was deliberately done. It was part of a process.

    Why Perfectionism Holds You Back

    Perfectionism is your enemy. You’ve heard it before — ‘Done is better than perfect.’ It’s cliché because it’s true.

    For most of us, me included, the instinct is to wait for the perfect idea, the ideal moment, the great piece of content, and to execute it to a level worthy of your own perfectionist criticism. 

    In a previous post, I described such a project that I started and then killed because of my pursuit of perfectionism. 

    If you wait for perfection, you never finish. If you never finish, you never fail, you never learn, and you never get better.

    I faced the same challenge when starting this blog. I had a very vague idea of what I wanted this channel to be. I had no idea how to start it, but I knew I didn’t want this project to die due to chasing perfection.

    Prioritize Output, Not Outcome

    So, I sat myself down and gave myself one simple task: Publish. 

    Here’s what I told myself: “You’ve got an hour.” An hour to produce something. Not something great. Just something finished. 

    I knew an hour wasn’t enough for anything substantial. But it was good enough to put up a piece of throwaway content — something to be deleted later. 

    The goal was to have something up there no matter the quality. The following Monday, I repeated the process. Two pieces of throwaway content were now online. By the third week, there were three pieces.   

    I wasn’t worrying about quality, not overthinking. I was just getting something out there. I posted content I knew wasn’t good — content that was intentionally imperfect. 

    Why Throwaway Content Works

    How do you get good at doing pull-ups? You start doing pull-ups. 

    The same applies to creating content — you start, even if it’s imperfect. The first few will be messy, maybe even painful, but you’ll get better by doing, not by waiting.

    Just like with pull-ups, over time you will get better — but only if you keep to the routine.

    When I started, I set my goal to publish. These posts weren’t meant to be good; they were just about forming a schedule. I knew they wouldn’t be perfect — and I didn’t care. They were throwaway content, meant for one purpose: to build the habit of publishing.

    And here’s the thing: By my fifth throwaway post, I was refining my process. I no longer had to force myself to sit down and publish — the resistance had been squashed. 

    By my sixth post I found myself focusing on the content and refining my workflow. My first five pieces of throwaway content were my best teachers.

    Creating throwaway content is just the beginning — building a routine is what drives momentum.

    Build Momentum Through Routines

    Throwaway content doesn’t necessarily mean bad content. I still worked to produce something worth sharing, but the focus was on finishing something within 1 hour. 

    The ultimate goal remained getting started, forming a routine, and building momentum. By putting something out there, no matter how imperfect, I achieved those goals.

    As I create more, I get faster, more confident, and more focused. It is through consistent action — not perfection — that I am improving.

    Sacrifice Perfection for Progress

    Imperfection is a tool, not a setback. By letting go of perfection early on, you learn faster, adapt quicker, and get better with each post.

    Sacrifice perfection. Focus on forming habits and routines in the early stages. Learn through doing. Start where you are, with what you’ve got, stumble, fail, and build from there. Sacrifice perfection in the short-term for long-term growth.

    Take Action: Post Your Fast Five

    Here’s your challenge: If you’re stuck, stop overthinking and start creating. Post five pieces of content — no matter how imperfect. Get them out there. Learn from them. Don’t be afraid of getting it wrong. The only way to get better is to start.

    Start. Finish something. Doesn’t matter what, doesn’t matter how good, doesn’t matter how bad, it just needs to be done.

    Post your first five pieces, throw them away, and move forward. Fail fast, learn faster, and get on the path to long-term growth.

  • Outlier Videos Don’t Build Channels: The Case for Consistency and Sustainable YouTube Growth

    Outlier Videos Don’t Build Channels: The Case for Consistency and Sustainable YouTube Growth

    My best performing video on The Photography Channel was an outlier. 

    While most videos struggled to break 100 views, this video crossed 100 comments in a few days and reached over 3,750 views; more than 50x the average of 73 views. 

    It also nearly killed my channel in the process.

    Video #52

    Before that outlier, I had already published 51 videos on my Photography Channel. They received very little views and I was understandably frustrated. 

    For 199 days and 20 videos, silence — until one professional photographer finally commented: ‘This is a criminally underrated channel!!!’ Very encouraging, but still no momentum.

    So I tried something new. I experimented with structure, stuck to my weekly upload schedule, and failed. I tried again. Failed. A third time. Same result.

    Then I decided to go all in on a radically new format. I thought it through endlessly, committed resources, and still wasn’t happy with it. But after it consumed too much time, I uploaded it anyway and left town for the weekend.

    By the time I was back online, Video #52 had taken off. Views spiked. Comments started pouring in. My subscribers jumped from 6 to 106.

    I thought I had cracked the formula. But I didn’t look at the numbers behind the numbers.

    The Numbers Behind The Numbers

    The first 51 videos took, on average, less than 8 hours to produce.

    Pre-Production0.567.2%
    Production2.8136.0%
    Post-Production3.8148.9%
    Publishing0.476.0%
    Marketing0.101.3%
    Other0.030.4%
    Total7.79100.0%

    Video #52 was different. It took a total of 61 hours to complete.

    Pre-Production26.7543.9%
    Production6.9211.4%
    Post-Production25.5041.9%
    Publishing0.250.4%
    Marketing1.502.5%
    Other–0.0%
    Total60.92100.0%

    The pre-production was manageable. The editing nearly broke me.

    The Trap

    A Tactical Error

    Not anticipating success was forgivable. Following it with three weaker videos, already in the pipeline, wasn’t. They performed like the old videos — but now it stung.

    A Strategic Failure

    The real strategic mistake was deciding to stick with the new heavy format. 61 hours for one video is unsustainable. That’s two weeks of full-time work, or a month if it’s a side project. 

    Still, I pushed forward. The next video took 42.5 hours — stretched painfully over 4.5 months. I forced it out just to publish. It was weaker, late, and momentum was gone. It tanked.

    Eventually, I returned to my previous (lighter) format. Consistency returned, views doubled, and growth resumed. Slow and steady.

    Until recently, when I repeated the same error: chasing another outlier. One month later, and still nothing to show for it. I had to stop and reset. Consistency is my top priority again.

    Consistency Leads To Sustainability

    Ideally, every video should be like video #52 — well-researched and executed. But that is not sustainable.

    I enjoyed the results. I hated the process. The 25+ hours of editing drained all joy. That’s not viable for a small channel. 

    That’s why I’m returning to the lighter format and weekly uploads. Not because consistency is a value on its own — but because it is a tool enabling sustainability.

    Growth may be slower. Views may be lower. But the channel will survive. 

    Cash Flow and Time Flow

    Starting an online social media business today has almost no barriers-to-entry. 

    In traditional business environments what usually causes small and starting businesses to fail is lack of cash flow. Creators fail from lack of time flow.

    Time is the true currency.

    Manage it like cash. Unlike cash, time can’t be replenished.

    You can’t build on outliers. Celebrate them when they happen, but it’s the average, repeatable videos that you consistently upload that carry a channel forward.

    I was watching the speedometer, ignoring the empty gas tank.

  • Systems Save Your Channel: Lessons from Three False Starts

    Systems Save Your Channel: Lessons from Three False Starts

    Three channels in eight years. Two are dead; the third is barely alive. Creators don’t die from lack of ideas — they die from lost momentum, burnout, or the refusal to hit publish. I know because I buried my own. Over-prepared, over-spent, over-thought — I dug the graves myself. I learned the hard way that perfectionism kills, momentum breaks, and only systems save your channel.

    Perfectionism Kills

    In 2017, I decided to start a YouTube channel. The idea was simple: document a hobby I was already sinking time and money into. I had a topic I cared about, a steady paycheck, and money to burn. So I burned it.

    I bought all the gear — and then some. A fancy camera, an expensive mic, a drone, the whole kit.

    By early 2018, I had the concept worked out. I designed a logo, built a release schedule, wrote a business plan, and mapped out my first series of videos.

    And yet, two years later, by December 2019 my channel had 0 views and 0 subscribers.

    I never uploaded a single video. I spent those years circling the drain — reading, rewriting, re-editing, scrapping, repeating. Chasing “perfect.” The videos were never “ready.”

    I wanted the launch flawless. No compromises. The result? A two-year-old channel with no videos, no viewers, no subscribers — only disappointment.

    In early 2020, I forced the launch. I ignored the shaky footage, the bad thumbnails, the weak topics. Done was better than perfect.

    Twelve episodes made it out. By the time the twelfth dropped, I knew it was the last.

    COVID may have killed the channel’s premise, but perfectionism had already buried it.

    Years of work, thousands of dollars spent, twelve episodes, and 29 subscribers to show for it.

    Not the worst blunder of my career, but it still stings.

    Momentum Breaks

    By the time COVID restrictions lifted, I was in a new job on a new continent — living inside a guarded compound in Africa. No roaming around with expensive gear there.

    What I did have was time. Weekends free. A reading list as long as the Nile. Old books, some out of print for decades. Then I found an article, more than a hundred years old, on a subject I was already obsessed with.

    In less than an hour, I had the first three episodes sketched. 

    I was starting a podcast.

    For nine straight Saturdays, I kept the streak. I’d finish the book I was reading, then record my voice into a beat-up office microphone. My “studio” was a blanket, two pillows, and a couple of couch cushions. It worked.

    The podcast was niche on top of niche, but it brought me joy. And then I moved again.

    Turbulent years. Asia. Europe. Africa. Asia, again. Four countries, three continents, three jobs — all in under three years.

    Each move broke the rhythm. And because the show was never baked into a system, I couldn’t recover it. The gear was minimal, the prep was light — but without a structure to anchor it, the podcast collapsed the moment life pulled me away.

    Momentum is hard to build, sometimes even harder to rebuild. 

    By the time I was ready to relaunch, I was back where I’d started in 2019. Full circle — and no podcast left standing.

    Systems Save Your Channel

    By 2023, I was back where I started: one dead YouTube channel and a broken podcast. Restarting either felt heavy — one required too much money, the other too much time. Both needed a serious reboot.

    So I started fresh. A new YouTube channel. Less ambitious than the first, lighter than the podcast. A weekly video on another hobby I’d picked up — photography.

    I’m now over sixty episodes in. The channel is still struggling to get traction, but it has potential.

    This time I launched without over-planning — and learned faster than I ever had before.

    Publish, learn, repeat. 

    I improved far faster than I ever did reading tutorials or obsessing over plans. Learning by doing works.

    But I underestimated the effort. Publishing weekly without systems meant every video felt like starting from scratch. The schedule slipped, the backlog grew, and catching up became the routine.

    One video blew up while I was on a business trip, and I had nothing ready to follow it. The spike died as quickly as it came. Inconsistency killed the chance to build momentum.

    Forget the myth that “consistency is for the algorithm.” Audiences might forgive missed uploads, algorithms might look the other way. But YouTube won’t invest in you if you don’t invest in yourself. 

    Consistency is for you — to create momentum, to keep learning, to stay sharp, to catch the rare moments when the door cracks open. And consistency comes from structure: templates and checklists to cut decision fatigue, a backlog to absorb life’s chaos, and a release pipeline that makes publishing as automatic as possible.

    Without those systems, you’re gambling on willpower. And willpower doesn’t scale. 

    Systems don’t just save time. Systems save your channel.

    Zen Against The Machine

    Through all of this — false starts, broken streaks, and hard-won lessons — I kept records. Every hour spent scripting, shooting, editing. Every dollar burned on gear I needed, and gear I didn’t.

    Zen Against The Machine exists to track those lessons in real time. To build in public. To show how creative projects survive, fail, or adapt when tested in the wild.

    The point isn’t to avoid mistakes. It’s to see them clearly, learn faster, and build with intent.

    If you want to see what it really takes to build an online business without hype or shortcuts, stick around or start here: The Experiment Begins.

    Take what’s useful for your project. Leave the rest.