Discoverability on the Internet is borderline nonexistent. There is no place people regularly go that would present them with foreign websites hosting content to their interest - there is too much money to be made in isolating and siloing users into the major consumptive hubs that already dominate.

I'd be willing to bet if you self-hosted a video blog your only viewers would be bots crawling it, anyone you directly shared a link with, and anyone they shared the link with. And those "share chains" peter out really fast if the content is not broadly applicable / viral worthy. It needs to get "likes" on social media to spread. That severely limits the kinds of material you can even try to make if you want anyone to actually see it, even if there might be millions of people in the world interested in the subject.

That's the thing that most people don't understand, though.

Most people complaining about YouTube's hosting policies don't actually have a problem with YouTube's hosting policies.

You can upload almost anything you want - as long as it's not illegal, infringes on copyright, or violates the most serious cultural taboos (nudity, etc). YouTube's hosting policies are fairly lax, and allows a lot of borderline content.

However, a lot of content exists on the gray edges of those borderlines. And YouTube allows you to upload things in that gray area. What it won't do, is drive audiences towards them, and it won't pay you for uploading it.

When people complain about YouTube being unfair to them, what they are actually complaining about, is that YouTube isn't paying them money, or driving audiences to them.

If those people were willing to wait for audiences to find them, or weren't motivated by profit, they wouldn't be complaining.

Even if you aren't driven by profit, it's pretty sad to spend time to create content and only have a handful of people see it.

Sure, but that's the story for most artists. Doesn't mean everyone's work should be showcased at The Louvre.