Or a highly pacified citizenry? ("Move on citizen. It's after dark. go home.")
What role does Youtube have in making a kumbaya kind of experience?
Why would any corporation want its customers to be happy?
Some businesses certainly don't need to care. A restaurant in central Rome has an infinite supply of new tourists to feed, so they don't need to worry about whether anyone wants to come back. At the other end of the spectrum, a monopolist knows that customers have no choice and must come back regardless of how they're treated.
YouTube has elements of both: there's a near-infinite supply of hopeful Internet video stars, and they also have a near-monopoly on video viewership. They might still want to keep stakeholders happy because these issues tend to brew for a long time until they blow up into public consciousness. (Facebook's promiscuous spreading of user data was known ten years ago, but they only took action now. Damage control would have been easier earlier.)
That's still a war, just a very one-sided war.
>What role does Youtube have in making a kumbaya kind of experience?
I'm assuming the question is "what reason does Youtube have", since their role is pretty clear: they control the platform. If they want people to keep using it, they have to keep those people happy. If they want to prevent a revolt, they have to keep people happy. Because unhappy, unstable people can turn violent. Keeping them happy won't necessarily stop all unstable people from turning violent, but you certainly do maximize that risk when you have some unstable people in your community and your community is already on the brink of a user revolt.
I'm not advocating that they should or should not care, but if one percent are revolting and 99% comes from the other, don't you think it is time to bring out the uzis?