This seems barely worth an article: the LAPD posted a violent assault asking people to identify the suspect, and YouTube (possibly an algorithm) suspended the account for posting violence.<p>Should violent content be allowed on the internet? I believe so. Should it be allowed on YouTube? I believe YouTube can decide: if they want to block violence, porn, and other 18+ content for everyone, that's fair and those people can post on the other sites. There's an argument that posting on YouTube instead of a less popular platform is necessary for LAPD to increase the audience and more likely identify the suspect; but I think there are better ways which get a higher-quality audience and don't involve exposing random people to a random assault.
I don't really care what YT does. I already know they're going to silence meaningful content if their algorithms determine it to be "sad" or "violent".<p>Interestingly, there is much content lost, demonetized, and simply not made because they determine factual content to be "sad". There's an amateur reporter and retired commercial pilot in central California who determined he both wouldn't go viral and wouldn't make much money because journalism and facts aren't what YT rewards.<p>This manipulation and ads like it's a goddamn cable network make it a pointless waste of time.
A simple search on YouTube for "man being shot dead" presents an endless stream of violent content, doubt this was algorithmic and I'm guessing was most likely the result of a flagging campaign because of local "politics".
This filled me with glee. I just very recently reported some of their videos. Many of their videos were "look at this highly edited body cam footage, we did good", which is to be expected, sure, but they also didn't allow comments (which if I understand correctly is illegal/unconstitutional).
Sure, I also hate youtube with all it's dark patterns, but... it's nice when the devil takes out a demon?