This is what the YouTube community flagged as hate speech


The arrest of Tommy Robinson

I received a notice Friday that the video below was flagged as offensive or hate speech by the youtube community.

The Sentinel doesn’t know much about the interviewee, Tommy Robinson. He’s a right-wing activist in England and has been accused of being an extremist who is anti-Islam. We posted articles about his arrest (he was arrested over nothing really).

The interview on this tape appears to be merely information. You can choose to believe it or not. How is this hate speech? Why doesn’t he have the right to present his side of things? Shouldn’t the viewers have the right to decide what is hateful or not.

If events really happened as he says, the hate was coming at him, not from him.

YouTube has deleted thousands of subscribers to our YouTube channel [it’s not monetized], claiming they were fake accounts. We wonder if that’s the case.



Your video Tommy Robinson interview second night out of jail was flagged to us by the YouTube community. Upon review, we have placed restrictions on how the video will be shown. Please note that your video will continue to be available on YouTube.

Video content restrictions

We believe in the principles of free speech, even when that speech is unpopular or potentially offensive to some viewers. However, YouTube doesn’t allow hate speech or content that promotes or incites violence. In some cases, flagged videos that do not clearly breach the Community Guidelines but whose content is potentially controversial or offensive may remain up, but with some features disabled.

Your video will be shown after a warning message. In addition, certain features such as comments, sharing, thumbs up, and suggested videos have been disabled. Your video is also ineligible for monetization.

For more information, please visit our Help Center.

How you can respond

While this is not a strike on your account, we still want to hear from you if you believe this was a mistake. If you would like to appeal this decision, please submit this form. You can also appeal directly from Video Manager. Our team will thoroughly review your appeal and will contact you again soon.

– The YouTube Team


Tell us what you think in the comment section or email please!

0 0 votes
Article Rating
Notify of

Oldest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
4 years ago

What they are doing to Robinson is utterly absurd. Every video of his, including one that was for cancer survivors is “restricted”. You Have to go past a restricted screen.

I’m starting to think it is Not just Big Tech that is the culprit here. I read recently how P&G has made “demands” on the tech industry to bow to “their” principles or lose ALL ad revenue. And this is how it all began. The “Corporate Elite” had begun the entire Adpocalypse that spurned every bit of censorship since. I don’t recall there being such an issue before that report in the news. So who is the Real culprit.

On another note about Section 230. All have agreed the Tech Giants are given “immunity” via that law, which means Congress has written a law “abridging” the rights of one party over the other. They have “chosen” a “side” in the Free Speech clause. I submit that “law”, Section 230, is Unconstitutional because they have violated the abridging wording by allowing Free Speech for one while restricting it for the other. This should even concern those “Conservatives” who are adamant in the “Congress shall pass no law” camp. It would be quite interesting for a Court Case to take up this issue. It would, or should, follow in the same manner as one case I read about, although the details escape me, where SCOTUS ruled some state law was in similar violation.