My favorite youtuber had 80% of his income coming from youtube before this change (he's set up a patreon in response) and he explained how it works. Youtube handles what ads are applied to which videos. All the youtuber has to do is decide if they want the ads at the beginning of the video, the end of the video, or in the middle some where if the video is extra long (or some combo of the 3). The youtuber doesn't have to speak to the company selling the add at all. So they don't have to change their messaging whatsoever to appease those companies. As long as they were getting good view numbers they were fine.

They are indirectly dependent to produce content that will not upset the private platform they're making their money with. That's the thing when you use 3rd parties to make money, they write the rules. I don't think anyone has the right to do what they want on a private store front.

That's like taking up a loan and then complaining about paying interest. Or complaining to your boss that you don't get a raise for doing the work in a way that's damaging to the business. 

So yeah, people will just have to deal with this shit until they're popular enough to switch to Patreon. They wouldn't even have publicity without youtube in the first place.

I think perhaps the biggest issue is the logic behind what type of content seems to be getting demonetized. The fact that you can lose ads simply because you talked about or reported on something related to atheism for example is quite distressing in my opinion. It just comes off as trying to restrict specific kind of content because some people don't agree with what it's saying.

I know a lot of people are saying that this isn't stopping them from still creating that content, but losing a source of income, however meager it may have been for some can result in many of them simply deciding its just not worth the time and effort anymore. This can result in Youtube becoming an echo chamber of just one specific type of opinion, and as someone who likes to watch and follow various different types of people with very differing opinions, losing that diversity would be a huge loss.

Professional journalism, even online, shouldn't rely on YouTube, where their contents get mixed with an overwhelming amount of amateur ones, except for quick, low-cost advertising of their true sites.
I read many online news quite regularly, and I never look for them on YouTube.
The only (un)professional YouTube channel I happen to watch quite regularly is Vevo, but I avoid it if I can as I deeply despise it for its medieval region locking policies, not to mention its bad habit to more often than not presume to "improve" the original sound of old music with a new equalization. Other music channels are less annoying, but they nevertheless tend to get lost in the ocean of contents uploaded by common users.
Last, but not least, YouTube search tools totally suck, they're not suitable at all to search anything more complicated than artist names and song titles.

User Requested removal

Most republican leaning opinions are considered controversial these days especially since there's a growing number of republicans who are against political correctness. All it takes to be flagged a few times. SJWs. I'm sure they'll go wild with flagging people. It doesn't matter if there's any truth the accusations.

I agree with youtube on the spirit of it but not how it will enforced or how it will likely play out. I'm skeptical person. Most things like that are rarely done in a sensible way. Also, youtube has already admitted that they don't have enough people to go through the amount of new vids they get each day.  They'll likely resort to some kind of automated system that searches for keywords and reporting/flagging. Hell, I bet the reports will handled by a automated system.

User Requested removal

You mean the american system is finally responding to Russian meddling?

I'd say it was about time...

How are indie Devs independent if they depend on people buying their games?

User Requested removal