A decent summary by Phillip DeFranco of the issue: Here's an article on Gizmodo that also mentions what's going on: http://gizmodo.com/youtubes-restricted-mode-is-hiding-some-lgbt-content-1793382337 From what I understand - Youtube has a "restricted" mode that (per a Youtube comment on DeFranco's video) may have existed for a few years now. It's off by default, and Google "uses community flagging, age-restrictions, and other signals to identify and filter out potentially inappropriate content". Anyway, this "restricted" mode does what the name suggests, and it intrigued people recently. While this doesn't affect ONLY the LGBTQ community (DeFranco mentions that none of his videos appear on the restricted mode, and popular youtubers like PewDiePie, SargonofAkkad, RoosterTeeth are also blocked - source: https://heatst.com/culture-wars/youtube-censors-everyone-feminists-lgbt-vloggers-pundits-and-gamers/), but it's predominantly about them now. Case in Point, Youtube's response: My thoughts: I'm not a Youtuber, but I don't think this is a big deal. Restricted Mode is an opt in setting that filters videos out. It doesn't do the best job at it, but I highly doubt it's a popularly used feature based on its all in or all out configuration. The LGBTQ+'s voices aren't being blocked on the Youtube platform itself, rather some videos are just being blocked on a mode that most people wouldn't consider using, alongside other youtube videos that Youtubers who aren't part of the LGBTQ+ community. For example in the Gizmodo link: British Youtuber Rowan Ellis who makes videos about "pop culture from a feminist and queer perspective" told Gizmode "that while she doesn’t know why this is happening, it’s troubling regardless, because it implies 'there is a bias somewhere within that process equating LGBTQ+ with ‘not family friendly.'" No. It's not bias, especially when there are family friendly Youtubers that are also being filtered out. NeonFiona told Gizmodo "that her videos focused on 'normalising LGBT+ stuff and especially bisexuality.' She worries that young people who turn to YouTube for information on LGBT issues will miss out: 'Kids who want to know about different orientations and definitions and about the history of LGBT people, etc, they can’t access that when their videos are being restricted. Restricting these videos makes it harder for these kids to find information they need and the community that they’ve been missing.'" But it completely ignores that Restricted Mode has to be opted in. It's not a forced default option, it's not a widely publicized option, and there's tons of other sources outside of youtube to discuss the different orientations, definitions, and history of LGBT people. It's a pointless argument made to imply that youtube is the first source people will go to and if we're being realistic, if someone is really interested in LGBT and for someone reason they are only given access to the restricted mode, are they really going to go on youtube to find their answer? SeaineLove told Gizmode "that she felt her video was “pretty G rated,” and that she simply wanted other LGBT youth to “be able to watch my videos and go ‘Hey, I feel the same way! That’s how I am too! Wow, that inspires me to be myself!'" And unless youtube is blocking her videos worldwide from public access, this statement has nothing to stand on. What she seems to assume (or how it's phrased at least) is that there are a lot of people who use restricted mode. And finally -- I would agree if all LGBTQ+ were being restricted. They're not, LGBTQ+ topics can still be found despite having restricted mode enabled. All in all, it's good to make people aware of the issues with restricted mode, but this isn't about the LGBTQ+ community specifically.