Any reason a local newspaper might not want to link directly to Youtube?

A local paper is doing a package on Youtube. Not once in either story do they mention that the actual address of the site is Youtube.com – it’s always just “Youtube.”

What’s more, in a prominent spot on the page, they list a link to visit: Not youtube.com, but “topyoutubevideos.com”.

Is there any logical reason they’d do this? What is “topyoutubevideos.com” anyway? It looks a little seedy. Why not just go to youtube and use their “most popular,” “highest rated,” and so on?

I’m considering giving the newsroom a call on Monday, but since they’re closed now, I figured I’d let you folks have a crack at it first. Any takers?