Is there some reason we cannot put the reason for the removal (misinformation) in the headline of this HN story, and save everyone the guessing/speculation?
But then what do we do with all these tar and feathers?
Yeah, I think the title here was editorialized. TLA's title is "YouTube removed video of Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. for violating vaccine misinformation policy", whereas the HN title is "YouTube Removes R.F. Kennedy Presidential Candidate Interview", which makes it sounds like YouTube removed official campaign materials.
It didn't all fit :/ also I see more A/B testing of headlines in incognito mode...
We'd just have to guess/speculate why they labeled it 'misinformation'. Nobody actually believes YouTube has any qualifications whatsoever to decide that. It's not a valid justification unless you accept corporate authoritarian censorship.