Uploaded September 2026 | Updated September 2026, 2 weeks ago
On August 31, numerous First Amendment auditing channels were reportedly demonetized by YouTube at approximately the same time. Why these channels? Why that day? Was this simply YouTube exercising its own content-moderation rights—or was somebody pressuring the platform behind the scenes?
In this livestream, Drew Ribar of Auditing Reno 911 examines two major Supreme Court cases:
• Moody v. NetChoice — Can government force private social-media companies to carry speech they would rather exclude?
• Murthy v. Missouri — When does government communication with a social-media company cross the line into unconstitutional coercion or censorship?
We’ll connect those decisions to the demonetization of Long Island Audit, Bay Area Transparency, Amagansett Press, San Joaquin Valley Transparency, Delete LawZ, The Battousai, Liberty Troll, and other accountability channels.
Who pulled the plug—Big Tech or Big Government? Did YouTube act independently? Were advertisers involved? Did government agencies or law-enforcement organizations complain? Or did increasingly confrontational content give YouTube the justification it needed?
Government involvement has not been proven. These are questions that deserve investigation.
This livestream presents commentary and personal opinion for educational and journalistic purposes. Drew Ribar is not an attorney, and nothing in this video constitutes legal advice.
Share your thoughts in the comments, subscribe to Auditing Reno 911, and help continue the discussion about censorship, government accountability, platform power, and the future of independent journalism.
#FirstAmendment #YouTubeCensorship #BigTech #Auditing #SocialMedia #MoodyVNetChoice #MurthyVMissouri #AuditingReno911
On August 31, numerous First Amendment auditing channels were reportedly demonetized by YouTube at approximately the same time. Why these channels? Why that day? Was this simply YouTube exercising its own content-moderation rights—or was somebody pressuring the platform behind the scenes?
In this livestream, Drew Ribar of Auditing Reno 911 examines two major Supreme Court cases:
• Moody v. NetChoice — Can government force private social-media companies to carry speech they would rather exclude?
• Murthy v. Missouri — When does government communication with a social-media company cross the line into unconstitutional coercion or censorship?
We’ll connect those decisions to the demonetization of Long Island Audit, Bay Area Transparency, Amagansett Press, San Joaquin Valley Transparency, Delete LawZ, The Battousai, Liberty Troll, and other accountability channels.
Who pulled the plug—Big Tech or Big Government? Did YouTube act independently? Were advertisers involved? Did government agencies or law-enforcement organizations complain? Or did increasingly confrontational content give YouTube the justification it needed?
Government involvement has not been proven. These are questions that deserve investigation.
This livestream presents commentary and personal opinion for educational and journalistic purposes. Drew Ribar is not an attorney, and nothing in this video constitutes legal advice.
Share your thoughts in the comments, subscribe to Auditing Reno 911, and help continue the discussion about censorship, government accountability, platform power, and the future of independent journalism.
#FirstAmendment #YouTubeCensorship #BigTech #Auditing #SocialMedia #MoodyVNetChoice #MurthyVMissouri #AuditingReno911
