YouTube has quietly worsened some of its web integrations, including ours.

During the past year, numerous readers have expressed concern about a specific issue with embedded YouTube links in our articles: it is no longer possible to click on the title to open the video on YouTube.com or in the YouTube app. Previously, this option worked seamlessly, but now it is not possible. This situation is also frustrating for us, especially because many assume that we have chosen to disable these links, which seems logical considering that it would benefit YouTube for people to access their app.

The reason behind this issue is, in summary, economic. YouTube has chosen to degrade the user experience in the embedded player that publishers like Vox Media use. To regain the link, it would be necessary to incorporate a different player that, instead of benefiting us, would pay YouTube more and us less.

I have come to this conclusion after months of investigating the cause of the broken links. After multiple exchanges between the teams at Vox Media and YouTube, even bringing the issue to the attention of YouTube's CEO, Neal Mohan, it seems there will be no changes.

Here is a more extensive explanation: like anyone else, we publish our videos on YouTube. However, the platform is not the same for everyone. Publishers like Vox Media have a product called YouTube Player for Publishers (PfP), which has been operational since 2016. This player allows publishers to sell ads more profitably while keeping videos within the YouTube ecosystem, thereby creating a win-win situation for both parties, something that hadn’t been discussed until early this year.

At the beginning of this year, YouTube decided to modify the PfP and remove all its branding from the player meant for publishers. This "branding," according to YouTube, includes the title link that redirects back to YouTube. If publishers want to keep that link, they are forced to use the standard YouTube player, which means giving up their advertising revenue and control over it. For this reason, many YouTube players on the web, not just ours, lack functional links, even though they visually operate the same as the standard YouTube player.

YouTube spokesperson Mariana De Felice stated that “news publishers can choose between the standard YouTube player or a version specifically designed for them, which offers greater control over the advertising experience but removes the YouTube branding and return links to the platform.” This second model provides publishers with greater control over the ads in their videos, although it prevents YouTube from monitoring which ads are displayed. To protect our advertisers and partners, we have decided to remove our branding and the return links to YouTube from the player.

I have voiced my dissatisfaction with this situation for months, as it had been functioning smoothly since 2016. However, this is the reality. Our options are limited to leaving things as they are, reducing our revenue to restore the link, or switching to another player on the site as a form of protest, which would also result in the absence of the link to YouTube, but would allow us to pretend that competition exists in the video player market. Ultimately, it will be the business area that makes the decision, but this explains the broken link, a small example of the current situation on the internet that reflects a much broader issue about its functioning.