(cont.) ...so if a company doesn't want to sponsor content about guns, the legality of guns is irrelevant. YouTube hooks product creators with content creators they want to work with, that's their business. Now if YouTube doesn't want to host certain content at all, even if no product creators want to advertise with them, THAT seems ethically questionable.

I agree in part with them and in part with you. I agree with you that they are using language loosely and it harms their point - let's not forget, hosting content is not free. YouTube is still subsidizing every video that is de-monetized.

Howevery, I think their overall point is that there should be a standard principle regarding content. There should not be "levels" of content where content that advocates a particular view, or comes from a particular group of people is deprioritized, unless that view is heinous or the content itself is dangerous. YouTube wants to be treated a public forum, so should not hold some views over others unless it is actively harmful.