YouTube Censorship: The Video They Didn't Want You to See!

0:00 Two days after its release, last week’s video on the Epstein files was on track

0:04 to become the most successful upload in my channel’s history.

0:08 It had gained a million views in 24 hours,

0:11 outpacing my previous record holder by nearly 40 percent.

0:16 The trajectory suggested that I had a big hit on my hands.

0:20 Then, a yellow dollar sign appeared on my YouTube dashboard,

0:23 signaling that the video had been "demonetized." You would expect that to mean

0:28 that I just stop earning ad revenue from the video- but in practice,

0:32 the consequences are a bit more severe.

0:34 When a video is deemed inappropriate to run ads

0:37 on- the platform’s incentive to distribute that video evaporates.

0:42 The recommendation engine– which is designed to maximize revenue for YouTube,

0:48 quietly shelves the content– viewers can still find it if they

0:52 look for it- but for my video- the view count flatlined immediately.

0:57 The platform provided no specific reason for the decision,

1:00 just the statement that the video was not advertiser friendly.

1:04 Sometimes I’m told– they’ll tell you which precise moment in the video

1:09 was deemed offensive– and you can then clip that section out.

1:13 In this case– it says that after a human

1:17 review (which I requested) that there are controversial

1:20 issues throughout the video– meaning that there is

1:23 nothing that I can do to make it acceptable.

1:25 When I go through the video and look

1:28 at YouTubes policies- their decision is difficult to understand.

1:32 The content was a thirty-seven-minute analysis

1:35 of the inconsistencies in the Epstein files,

1:39 specifically with regard to FBI redactions that appeared

1:42 to violate the Transparency Law passed by Congress.

1:46 The video contained no profanity, no violence,

1:50 no descriptions of Epstein’s activities and no

1:53 inappropriate imagery was shown on screen.

1:56 The audience metrics confirm that the content was not offensive to viewers.

2:01 At the time of demonetization, the video had accrued 90,000 likes and maintained

2:07 a like-to-dislike ratio of 98.9 percent- which

2:11 is an unusually high approval rating for a video–

2:16 higher than on most of my videos,

2:19 implying that the viewers—the very people advertisers supposedly

2:22 need protection from- found the content acceptable and valuable.

2:28 The title, "The Epstein Files are Worse Than You Think!", was unambiguous too.

2:34 No viewer clicked on it expecting a cooking tutorial only

2:37 to be ambushed by a critique of the justice system.

2:48 To understand why this happens on YouTube,

2:51 we need to look back to the 'YouTube Adpocalypse.' Years ago,

2:55 after Logan Paul’s infamous vlog from a Japanese

2:59 forest triggered a massive advertiser exodus,

3:01 big brands paused their YouTube advertising campaigns.

3:05 It was a simple commercial calculation:

3:08 they worried that appearing next to offensive

3:11 content (like a Logan Paul video) might be

3:15 misconstrued as an endorsement or simply link

3:18 their brand to something awful in the viewer's mind.

3:22 YouTube responded by drastically tightening its creator guidelines.

3:27 If you wanted to earn advertising money

3:29 on the platform– you couldn’t behave like Logan Paul… Now,

3:33 I recognize that YouTube is a for-profit business.

3:37 As a creator whose videos are often sponsored, I am also accustomed to dealing

3:43 with advertisers and fully appreciate their concerns.

3:46 Businesses have a clear duty to protect their brands,

3:49 and YouTube needs to organize the platform to secure that revenue.

3:54 This arrangement benefits everyone:

3:56 advertiser spending funds the whole ecosystem.

3:59 If a video is genuinely hateful or dangerous,

4:03 demonetization is a logical business decision for YouTube as it

4:08 preserves free speech while insulating advertisers from toxic content.

4:12 The problem is that this mechanism has evolved into a blunt

4:17 instrument that penalizes serious journalism under the guise of brand safety.

4:23 Advertisers routinely buy slots on mainstream

4:26 cable news programs that discuss war, crime, and political corruption.

4:30 Yet when an independent creator examines these same topics with equal rigor,

4:37 the algorithm flags it as being inappropriate.

4:40 The evidence suggests that we are not dealing

4:43 with a calculated conspiracy to silence a specific controversial story,

4:48 but instead a broken system at YouTube.

4:51 I spoke with a friend who runs a much larger channel than mine who has

4:55 produced multiple videos on the same topic–

4:58 and asked whether his Epstein videos had been demonetized,

5:02 given that two of my three uploads on the subject have now been penalized.

5:07 He reported no issues, noting only that he is careful to avoid

5:12 profanity and that he bleeps out any sensitive terms.

5:15 This is reassuring, as it implies there is nothing sinister at play.

5:20 However, it reveals that YouTube has

5:22 an arbitrary system where demonetization depends less

5:26 on the subject matter and possibly more

5:28 on the algorithmic status of the uploader.

5:31 Of course, given the platform's opacity, we can’t know this for sure.

5:36 There has been some research on how Demonetization works on YouTube–

5:40 but before I go through that– let me tell you about our video

5:45 sponsor Saily- an e sim provider who makes it incredibly easy

5:49 to travel and stay connected without

5:51 having to pay ridiculous foreign roaming charges,

5:54 find a local SIM card or waste your time constantly trying to find public Wi-Fi.

5:59 I hadn't heard of this technology before trying out

6:03 Saily this summer- but it's an app that you

6:05 install on your phone which allows you to stay

6:08 connected in over 200 places around the world.

6:11 There is no need to buy and swap physical SIM cards when you

6:15 travel.You just download the app once and use it whenever you are abroad.

6:20 You choose how much data you want and for how long.

6:23 It's way cheaper than roaming and takes seconds to set up.

6:27 You just select the country you are travelling to and plan

6:30 and activate an e-SIM before you leave home- when you land,

6:34 your phone automatically connects to a local network with no hidden charges.

6:38 There is no fussing around at the airport,

6:41 you can book an uber, access GPS or make a call.

6:44 So if you've got travel plans,

6:46 click the link in the description or scan this QR code to download the app.

6:51 Then choose a plan in the country you're going to and use my code BOYLE,

6:56 at checkout to get an exclusive 15% discount.

7:00 Researchers have termed this problem "censorship by proxy."

7:05 A 2022 study found that demonetization effectively

7:09 acts as a censor because it creates

7:12 a financial disincentive for creators to cover "risky" topics.

7:16 The study’s machine learning models show

7:18 that the algorithm favors "safe" metrics

7:20 like channel size and video duration over the specific details of the content.

7:26 Creators essentially build up trust with the algorithm- and once trusted,

7:32 are less likely to be demonetized.

7:34 This possibly explains why my second Epstein video was demonetized so quickly.

7:39 The study also shows that when the algorithm

7:42 decides a topic is "unsafe," it restricts distribution,

7:46 making the content almost invisible to all but the most

7:50 dedicated subscribers who will seek every new video out.

7:54 This "safety" filter—as the authors note—notoriously fails to grasp context.

8:01 The channel Vlogging Through History documented this issue,

8:04 reporting that his educational videos on World War

8:08 Two were demonetized simply for displaying a two-second

8:11 clip of a flag from that period-

8:14 or for discussing the bad thing that happened in 2001.

8:18 The algorithm groups Nick [CENSOR] and a historian

8:21 explaining an important World War two battle into the same category– and then-

8:27 both face the same penalty: the revenue cliff.

8:30 For this reason, creators sometimes feel

8:32 forced to modify their language to survive.

8:35 This has given rise to what is known as 'algospeak,'

8:39 a surreal new online dialect where creators replace clinical terms

8:44 with nonsense words—saying 'something' instead of 'something else' or 'PF

8:49 file' instead of 'bleep'—hoping to slip past the automated filters.

8:54 Serious discourse then becomes a childish code,

8:57 degrading the quality of information in exchange for algorithmic safety.

9:02 In my video, I used the correct terms because it seems ridiculous to me to speak

9:07 in a code that my audience might not

9:11 understand—and because we are discussing a serious topic.

9:17 The algorithm responded by demonetizing the video.

9:23 This type of suppression matters because the format

9:27 of online video offers something traditional media often can’t: depth.

9:32 A cable news segment typically lasts four minutes;

9:35 a newspaper article runs for around 700 words.

9:39 My video was thirty-seven minutes long– and attempted to give a balanced

9:44 view of what had been revealed by the government and why it matters.

9:49 This long form format allows

9:51 for a detailed examination of complex timelines—such

9:54 as the fact that Epstein was first reported to the FBI in 1996,

9:58 or that his financial crimes date back to the 1970s.

10:02 It allows us to explore the systemic failures

10:05 of the FBI and the DOJ that span multiple administrations,

10:10 rather than reducing the story to a partisan soundbite.

10:15 When algorithms penalize this type of depth and discussion,

10:18 they don't just hurt creators; they harm public understanding of complex topics.

10:24 The released Epstein files are heavily redacted,

10:27 often in ways that don’t appear to comply with the Transparency Law.

10:32 These redactions obscure the names

10:34 of potential co-conspirators while leaving victims exposed.

10:38 Covering these dry, procedural details is

10:41 essential for holding power to account, yet it is exactly this type

10:46 of content that can be judged "non-advertiser friendly”–

10:49 by the algorithm– even if not by advertisers– like my video sponsors or viewers.

10:57 This creates a bizarre paradox.

10:59 Mainstream news outlets in many parts of the world

11:03 are increasingly buckling under financial and regulatory pressure.

11:06 It is not just about threats from the FCC to strip broadcast licenses;

11:11 it is about the bottom line.

11:13 We have seen networks pay millions

11:15 in settlements to politicians to resolve legal disputes,

11:18 effectively paying for their right to operate.

11:22 We saw this quite clearly when Bari Weiss recently shelved a fully vetted 60

11:28 Minutes investigation into deportations because she said

11:31 the White House had refused to comment.

11:34 As the correspondent noted- if the government’s refusal

11:38 to participate becomes a valid reason to spike a story,

11:42 we have effectively handed them a "kill

11:45 switch" for any reporting they find inconvenient.

11:49 Simultaneously, corporate consolidation has become

11:51 a point of political leverage.

11:53 The Warner Bros.

11:55 Discovery merger remains stalled in regulatory limbo,

11:58 with the administration signaling that approval hinges on 'correcting'

12:03 the editorial stance of its news division, CNN.

12:07 For media conglomerates burdened by massive debt,

12:11 this creates an existential dilemma:

12:13 they can maintain their journalistic independence,

12:16 or they can secure the regulatory approval they need to survive.

12:21 Increasing numbers are choosing survival.

12:24 The independent creators who fill the gap fare no better.

12:29 The United States has recently fallen to 57th

12:32 out of 180 countries when ranked for press freedom.

12:36 It is seemingly easier for politicians to coerce the few

12:40 remaining broadcast giants than to go after millions of independent bloggers,

12:46 podcasters, and YouTubers.

12:47 Yet, if the primary platform for independent video journalism effectively

12:52 taxes serious reporting by removing its revenue and its reach,

12:57 that ranking will likely slide even lower."

13:00 YouTube is not merely an American platform; it has global reach.

13:04 In countries with strict state censorship,

13:07 citizens often rely on VPNs to access YouTube

13:10 as one of their few windows into the unfiltered world.

13:15 If the platform itself begins to sanitize

13:17 content to appease Western politicians or advertisers,

13:21 it inadvertently aligns itself with the goals of those restrictive regimes.

13:26 By disincentivizing the coverage of serious topics,

13:30 YouTube shuts off the 'escape valve' for global information,

13:35 homogenizing the internet into a safe,

13:38 corporate-friendly feed that challenges no one.

13:41 There is a distinct irony to digital censorship: the Streisand Effect.

13:46 Attempts to suppress information often make it more popular.

13:51 After I posted a community update explaining that my video had been demonetized,

13:56 thousands of viewers watched the video specifically because it had been flagged.

14:01 The like to dislike ratio went even higher

14:04 and many new viewers subscribed to the channel.

14:07 Viewers understand that in an era of algorithmic curation,

14:11 the "unsafe" label is sometimes a proxy

14:14 for "important." Similarly the 60 minutes episode that had been shelved by Bari

14:19 Weiss– had already been broadcast in Canada–

14:23 Canadian viewers uploaded it to the internet and it quickly went viral online

14:27 as viewers rushed to see the episode that they had not been allowed to see.

14:32 It is crucial to distinguish between the "politics"

14:35 of this case and the "morality" of it.

14:38 My critique of the decline in press freedom under

14:41 the current administration should not be misconstrued as a partisan attack.

14:45 The failure to prosecute Jeffrey Epstein and his co-conspirators

14:49 is not a Republican issue or a Democrat issue;

14:52 it is a moral issue that hints at the institutional

14:56 rot in our justice system that spans decades and administrations.

15:01 History shows that press freedom is vulnerable under leadership of any stripe.

15:07 While attacks on the press have risen by 25 percent this year,

15:10 a look at the data from the U.S.

15:13 Press Freedom Tracker reveals that the highest number of journalists

15:17 arrested or assaulted in recent history actually occurred in 2020.

15:21 These incidents were largely linked

15:24 to the civil unrest surrounding the Black Lives

15:27 Matter protests and the enforcement of pandemic

15:30 restrictions—these protests were concentrated in cities

15:34 and states governed by Democrats—and so it is no surprise that with a spike

15:39 in violence in these states there was

15:41 also a spike in violence against journalists.

15:44 This shows that the urge to suppress uncomfortable

15:48 press coverage is not unique to one party;

15:51 it is a reflex of power that manifests

15:54 whenever the streets—or the internet—become too noisy.

15:57 This is why the Epstein case is so critical:

16:02 it unites the public against that oppressive reflex.

16:05 The legislative push to release

16:07 the Epstein files enjoyed rare bipartisan support.

16:11 Congress voted almost unanimously to bring these documents to light;

16:16 only one lawmaker voted against the release.

16:19 The frustration about how this case is being

16:22 dealt with is not limited to Washington either.

16:25 At a recent Turning Point USA event—a

16:28 gathering of the MAGA faithful—Laura Ingraham asked

16:31 the audience to clap if they were

16:36 satisfied with the results of the Epstein investigation.

16:42 The room didn’t clap.

16:53 They booed.

16:54 People of all political persuasions get what the algorithm seems to be missing-

16:59 that the Epstein story is a moral scandal about a two-tier justice system,

17:04 not a political football.

17:06 This shared outrage makes the 'unsafe'

17:09 categorization by YouTube even more baffling.

17:12 The public is united in wanting to know why, for example,

17:16 current FBI Director Kash Patel claimed

17:19 there were no perpetrators other than Epstein, when the released files indicate

17:25 the FBI identified ten potential co-conspirators.

17:29 They want to know why Patel claimed to have

17:32 seen footage proving nothing untoward happened in Epstein’s cell,

17:35 only to release a video recorded in a different part of the cell

17:39 block with a critical minute of footage conspicuously missing due to a 'glitch’.

17:45 Covering these discrepancies is not "hate speech" or "harassment."

17:48 It is the basic function of a free press.

17:52 When smaller channels see my video get demonetized,

17:55 they are likely to take note.

17:58 If you are running a small channel and are relying on advertising

18:01 checks to pay your rent- the signal sent by demonetization would be clear:

18:06 "Don’t touch this topic.

18:07 Stick to gaming.

18:09 Stick to drama.

18:10 Leave the questioning of authority to the professionals at news organizations

18:14 who are currently too frightened to actually do it.” A final,

18:19 bitter irony defines this whole experience.

18:22 The algorithm can quickly flag my video as "advertiser

18:26 unfriendly" yet it fails to police actual fraud.

18:30 In recent weeks, my likeness has been used

18:33 here on YouTube in deepfake videos promoting scams.

18:39 Despite my repeated reports,

18:44 YouTube has been slow to remove these impersonations.

18:54 We are left with a system that penalizes journalism for being too serious,

19:00 while dragging its feet on removing AI-generated fakes.

19:05 The yellow demonetization icon offers one

19:08 positive aspect– and that is transparency.

19:12 Being notified of demonetization is preferable

19:15 to being silently throttled in the background,

19:18 a practice known as 'shadowbanning.' At least I am told when I’ve been censored,

19:23 even if the reasoning remains vague.

19:25 In other parts of the world, censorship is a much more frightening event.

19:29 Here, it is not a knock on the door, but a quiet algorithmic nudge.

19:34 It is less dramatic, but in the long run,

19:37 it may be just as effective at narrowing the public discourse.

19:41 My plan is to continue covering the topics I find interesting and that I

19:46 think my viewers will find interesting too-

19:48 whether the videos are monetized or not.

19:51 But for the broader ecosystem,

19:53 this algorithmic censorship is worth worrying about.

19:56 It forces us to ask what YouTube wants to be.

20:00 If the platform’s incentives aggressively filter out the "boring"

20:04 work of holding power to account—the deep dives,

20:07 the legal analysis, the historical context—then it

20:11 ceases to be a digital public square.

20:14 It risks becoming a place solely for childish entertainment,

20:18 safe for advertisers but useless for democracy.

20:21 If you want to watch my demonetized video– here is a link–

20:26 the great thing is that you can watch it without adverts.

20:30 Our sponsors keep the channel going– so if you are travelling soon- don’t

20:33 forget to check out our sponsor Saily using the link in the description.

20:38 Have a great day and talk to you again soon.

20:42 Bye.