On the Instapundit site, I ran across this reference to Google's double standard on freedom of speech. For a full account from the British man whose videos can no longer been seen on YouTube, Click Here. The man seems to be flummoxed; he speaks hesitatingly, and, several times, flounders around for his thoughts. I have to believe that he is devastated by the corporate denial of service.
For, that's what this is - a CORPORATE decision to remove his access. YouTube is NOT a public entity; they have the complete right to refuse his use of his service.
Which is not to say that I'm in agreement with the Google decision - feel free to contact them to urge re-instatement of his account. But, this is NOT a case of censorship - that's a decision by a government to repress speech or writing.
Other accounts of the action are at Slashdot, whose story about Google's actions is linked.
I'm hoping for a free-speech advocate (or foundation) to start up an alternative to Google's YouTube. Be warned, however, they will also likely host videos that exploit women, are incredibly gross, over-the-top incendiary, politically marginal - perhaps with doubtful conspiracy theories or mysterious plots. Of course, they will have the option to put limits on the content, but profitability is the alternative tug on their emotions.
A better suggestion may be for a free-speech foundation to host space for the rejected. With bandwidth getting so cheap, it couldn't cost that much. Of course, the videomakers will lose the access of YouTube - and the audience. They'll find their audience is like the PBS audience - limited, self-selected, and out of touch with the mainstream. Not unlike Nick Gisburne.