Only issue I see here is the manual review process and subjectivity baked into that.
2) transparency is zilch.
3) rule changes came overnight.
4) no system to "pre-approve" videos.
5) it's affecting tons of completely innocuous videos. My wife runs a family friendly vlog, prior to October she'd never had a problem with any of her thousands of videos, and now every other one is demonetized without explanation.
From a creator experience it's just confirmation the platform is totally dead and beyond saving. The algos have won.
See the Controversial section here: https://i.imgur.com/vkBrkns.jpg
e.g. religious videos of any sort are automatically deemed controversial (way more inclined to be right leaning), but videos about racial justice (left) are exempt (unless, of course, they are anti-racial justice videos, in which case they must be removed.)
Thats not what it says. It reads "Content promoted by extreme religious groups" - Certainly there is subjectivity here and Google should provide clearer guidelines on what is deemed "extreme" (clearly violent jihad and isis recruiting would be considered extreme, and general islam/muslim content should be considered okay).
But it clearly does not say "religious videos of any sort".
You seem to come to this with a bias that Google is left leaning and why you see a political leaning situation here. I am a centrist and do not.
The problem here is the looseness of the guidelines and the complexity of navigating deep issues with nuance.
Entertain me here for a second... Let's talk about a few hypothetical videos:
"The positive contributions of undocumented migrants in the US" - positive content about immigrants. Exempt from demonetization per the guidelines.
"The problem with illegal immigration in the US" - antagonism of a specific group of people/xenophobia per the guidelines. Should be demonetized.
Now, do you think it's an unreasonable position to say that undocumented immigration has both pros and cons? Of course not, everything does.
Youtube's distillation of rules that only allow for discussion of one side these issues with zero nuance is the problem. Coincidentally or not, the allowed positions for discourse align with the brand's corporate values.