I am not claiming that. In fact, it's probably necessary to prevent that kind of disaster, and I wish YouTube would ban a bit more aggressively - but also with more thought and better review.

(I seem to have been misunderstood quite badly, a sibling comment to yours makes exactly the opposite allegation! Also, I'm a Brit)

The risk of any ban system is that true-but-inconvenient stuff ends up getting banned as well. The very real risk that video evidence of murders by police might be banned for "promoting violence", for example. There's already the controversy over removing evidence of war crimes in Syria - kind of understandable, given that those must be pretty traumatic videos.

Nah if you wanted to prevent the genocide you need to kill the perperators until they stop. Blaming the channel for genocide is as facile as blaming encryption for crime since in both cases they could talk to the same people to plan crimes. Genocide occured when humans were hunter-gatherers stop blaming the tech for it.

That's not prevention, though, that's punishment after the fact. Prevention requires doing something about it in the very early stages.

(yes, this is a pre-crime argument, but crimes against humanity committed by and on behalf of states or warring ethnic factions are qualitively different from ordinary crime.)

That is a sweeping generalization if I’ve ever heard one. Do you really think most Americans are like that?

I think you’re inflating the views of the few outspoken fools too be that of the majority.