Deflecting the point that he can setup his own broadcasting plaftform.. youtube is a broadcasting Service.. Its their rules.. So you want porn on it? Untill someone flags it? But then you'll appeal its not porn so then everyone can view it again? If he doesn't want to deal with people getting offended by his videos ( i used mh17 as an example why people might be offended) which are still not censored cause then it would have been deleted and not put away behind a free login.. He should make his own website.. Or use any other broadcasting service.. 

Pretty sad, thats why google should be banned like in china. They are still a US company after all, so they try to inforce US interests first. Just look at the content ID madness, the entire US copyrate law is incoopereted into it and counts for everyone uploading videos even if he/she isnt an US-american.

Haha.  Dude, look up Freedom of Speech, then look up Freedom of Association.  Freedom of Speech covers you from a Government or entity of the State, impeding your ability to speak your mind.  Freedom of Association, allows any person or group (let's call it a business) to associate, of their own free will, with whoever the fuck they want to associate with.  Now, take a wild guess, who Google has no desire to associate with?  And Google resides in the US, so any and all attempts at litigation would end up being thrown out on the very Amendment you seem so anxious to parrot (Freedom of Speech and Association are both part of the First Amendment in the US Constitution).

Mr. Batshit crazy conspiracy theorist, has no legal right to put any videos on youtube, that youtube and it's parent company Google, have no desire to associate with.  End of story.

Well ok, now that's a very valid argument and something that absolutely needs to be addressed in the US.  Many of our laws weren't designed with the internet and digital age in mind, so the country has struggled in that regard for years now, copyright, trademark and patent law are ridiculous here.  However, that doesn't change the fact that Google can host whatever it wants to, and is protected under the First Amendment, in doing so.  The reasoning is simple too, youtube isn't a hosting site for every type of content out there.  It has rules that everyone must abide by. 

And even with updated copyright/patent/trademark law, this particular situation wouldn't fall under it.

Could do, but I doubt that'll be effective, either.  Youtube channels tend to develop a "herd" mentality around their leaders. There's a good chance that they'd all take offense to genuinely flagged videos and start abusing the appeals process.

It's not a big deal either way, though. Flagging doesn't remove content, and if the channel owner (or his agency) haven't bothered appealing, that means they either agree with the flag (remember, they can set this flag themselves), or it isn't warranting them enough lost views to justify the effort to appeal.

If Google wanted to censor, they could do it in far more transparent ways than flagging content, like adjusting search result, making sure videos never get pushed to people's "subscriptions", limiting the bandwidth so that it takes too long to buffer, etc.

This isn't a 'welcome to Corporate America' moment, as I already explained, this has nothing to do with the copyright/trademark/patent issues of the US.  All of this falls under the 1st Amendment, and every company or person has these rights.