I'd be surprised if there weren't a bunch of kids who really wanted to see content from the latest Minecraft update.

Sure, it will start shifting once they want to watch something their peers watch. But at the time parents choose the media, how would they even know it's not the latest production, or some mix of old/new?

Peppa pig started in 2004. At the time kids are interested in it, if you show them ep 2, will they say "this is not from series 6 from 2019"?

Even with a more restrictive approach Google/YouTube could whitelist specific content providers, which could provide fresh content on a frequent schedule.

I was about to suggest that content creators pay a nominal fee for the content to be reviewed but if creators have no way to monetize the platform, that proposal is bijective with suggesting that Google just shut down YTKids. Or are parents paying already for access to YTKids and the reviews would come out of that?

The argument here is whether imperfect curation is better than none, and the history of television tells us that it is. We never had a TV channel that randomly showed kids pro-suicide messages.

This sentiment is so shocking that I had to say something.

Please no. Let's not encourage a world where people are even less free to share their ideas.

I get where you're coming from, but "Think of the children!" has been used to justify so many evils throughout history. It's an emotional appeal that should be resisted.

Putting up barriers would also be the first step towards losing dominance. But in the short term, it would suck not being able to share a video without waiting a long time or being approved.

But won’t someone think of the poor content creators who might have to wait or upload their content somewhere else!

"Think of the children" is equally bland.

somehow youtube became the parent that oversees what content your kids get. this to me is a dereliction of your parenting requirements.