YouTube/GunTube Policy change - what do you think?

[treelogger]

I’m sure you can google it if you want. They all have a left wing culture especially not friendly to firearms

That is an over-generalization that becomes a false statement. I've spent the last ~30 years working in Silicon Valley, in just these companies. The political, ethical, and philosophical views of the employees of these companies simply reflect that demographics of the valley: somewhere between 2/3 and 80% are liberal / progressive / libertarian, the others conservative. Several Silicon Valley companies have internal shooting leagues sponsored by the companies, with regular competitions and meetings at Reeds or Metcalf. I've worked with many colleagues who are gun collectors and active competitive shooters. And with many who are also politically or religiously conservative. As just some publicly visible example: Two former CEOs of Hewlett-Packard (the prototypical Silicon Valley tech company) ran for high office as republicans, and the CEO of Tesla ran DOGE at the beginning of the current presidency.

In many cases, the politically relevant actions of these companies match the preferences of their employees, including those in the C-suite. Claiming that this is a "left wing culture" which leads to de-facto censorship is incorrect. On the contrary, I would describe the typical viewpoint as much more libertarian: live and let live.

But that is also tempered by something much more important: A great aversion to risk, and a great love for profit. Is being associated with firearms risky? Yes very, because every time something bad happens involving firearms, the lawsuits go flying. Does being publicly seen as associating with or supporting firearms endanger profits? Yes, because after every mass shooting advertisers don't want to be seen on the videos that the perpetrator watched. Youtube in particular has become very sensitive to creating echo chambers, and its content being used by extremists and crazies, and seen by society as a net negative. While the social media companies are very careful to not do blanket banning of uncommon content and viewpoints, they try to at least confine ad revenue to mainstream forms of expression.

The underlying issue here is that firearms are becoming much more politically polarized, and associated with fringe groups in society. And a lot of that comes from gun people: as long as they embrace not only republicans, but the right edge of republican thought, and as long as they treat democrats (a.k.a. libtards and demonrats) and moderates (who are said to suffer from TDS) as the devil incarnate, this will not improve. If gun culture expects the benefits of being part of the mainstream, it also needs to embrace mainstream mores, such as comity and respect.

 

[Gawernator]

That is an over-generalization that becomes a false statement. I've spent the last ~30 years working in Silicon Valley, in just these companies. The political, ethical, and philosophical views of the employees of these companies simply reflect that demographics of the valley: somewhere between 2/3 and 80% are liberal / progressive / libertarian, the others conservative. Several Silicon Valley companies have internal shooting leagues sponsored by the companies, with regular competitions and meetings at Reeds or Metcalf. I've worked with many colleagues who are gun collectors and active competitive shooters. And with many who are also politically or religiously conservative. As just some publicly visible example: Two former CEOs of Hewlett-Packard (the prototypical Silicon Valley tech company) ran for high office as republicans, and the CEO of Tesla ran DOGE at the beginning of the current presidency.

In many cases, the politically relevant actions of these companies match the preferences of their employees, including those in the C-suite. Claiming that this is a "left wing culture" which leads to de-facto censorship is incorrect. On the contrary, I would describe the typical viewpoint as much more libertarian: live and let live.

But that is also tempered by something much more important: A great aversion to risk, and a great love for profit. Is being associated with firearms risky? Yes very, because every time something bad happens involving firearms, the lawsuits go flying. Does being publicly seen as associating with or supporting firearms endanger profits? Yes, because after every mass shooting advertisers don't want to be seen on the videos that the perpetrator watched. Youtube in particular has become very sensitive to creating echo chambers, and its content being used by extremists and crazies, and seen by society as a net negative. While the social media companies are very careful to not do blanket banning of uncommon content and viewpoints, they try to at least confine ad revenue to mainstream forms of expression.

The underlying issue here is that firearms are becoming much more politically polarized, and associated with fringe groups in society. And a lot of that comes from gun people: as long as they embrace not only republicans, but the right edge of republican thought, and as long as they treat democrats (a.k.a. libtards and democrats) and moderates (who are said to suffer from TDS) as the devil incarnate, this will not improve. If gun culture expects the benefits of being part of the mainstream, it also needs to embrace mainstream mores, such as comity and respect.

Nahhh, it's definitely true in general. Of course there are conservative holdouts that stay under the current but working at Twitter it was blatantly obvious how strong the bias was especially under Jack. There was an entire censorship culture war because of it. That's why Elon fired so much of the dead weight like you mentioned haha. Whelp if Democrats stopped trying to ban guns or pass other anti gun laws they wouldn't be seen that way.

 

[Gawernator]

and yet the facts tell us . . .

That's nothing for them. Post-COVID there was a big shift in culture away from the late 2016's PC culture taking over. Companies will try to appease whoever gets them the most power

 

[ikeo1]

Nahhh, it's definitely true in general. Of course there are conservative holdouts that stay under the current but working at Twitter it was blatantly obvious how strong the bias was especially under Jack. There was an entire censorship culture war because of it. That's why Elon fired so much of the dead weight like you mentioned haha. Whelp if Democrats stopped trying to ban guns or pass other anti gun laws they wouldn't be seen that way.

You're conflating two different things. Tech companies don't request changes to gun laws. Your single experience doesn't reflect the greater valley culture. They aren't inherently anti-gun as much as its not a part of their life nor do they want it to be. Meg whitman from Ebay, Larry Ellison, and others are not democrats and core silicon valley heads.

The blanket statement is just wrong and outdated.

 

[Brandon Breeze]

Any other benefits to being an ambassador ?

I get 10% off on all products in the store, none of which they will send to CA.

Have yet to hear about whatever the discount for the demo pistols is.

Bob just made a video with an update and "the wait will be worth it" is the claim. Who knows. They never respond to emails and the ambassador portal has been down for weeks with zero ETA.

I've been an "Ambassador" since February for reference.

 

[cali_jazz]

This may provide some context for YouTube’s new branded-content rules. Everytown put this out Sept. 16 specifically targeting the financial relationships between the firearms industry and “Guntubers.” What caught my attention is that they specifically cite YouTube’s September policy change prohibiting branded content involving weapons or ammunition, and they’re urging YouTube to go even further by cutting off what they describe as the financial pipeline between manufacturers and influencers.

The big unanswered question is still T&E guns. YouTube defines branded content broadly enough to include receiving “something of value,” but I haven’t found any clarification from YouTube saying whether a firearm temporarily loaned to a reviewer for an independent review counts.

If anyone has seen an actual response from YouTube specifically addressing T&E loaners, please post it.

New Everytown Report Exposes How Gun Industry Money Built “Guntube,” Fueling Gun Sales, Violence, and Extremism

NEW YORK – A new Everytown for Gun Safety report, Loaded Content, released today, details how the firearms industry has actively funded a powerful marketing ecosystem of online content creators, …

everytownsupportfund.org

• Press Release

New Everytown Report Exposes How Gun Industry Money Built “Guntube,” Fueling Gun Sales, Violence, and Extremism​

9.16.2026


NEW YORK – A new Everytown for Gun Safety report, Loaded Content, released today, details how the firearms industry has actively funded a powerful marketing ecosystem of online content creators, known as “guntubers,” to promote their firearms directly to millions of viewers on YouTube. The report examines how gun manufacturers and retailers use influencer marketing to sidestep advertising bans, how guntubers amplify dangerous weapons and political extremism, and key policy and enforcement gaps on YouTube. The full report can be accessed here.

Key points from the report include:

• Guntube is a deliberately constructed, industry-funded marketing ecosystem built to sell firearms directly to millions of viewers. Social media influencers drove an estimated 1 to 1.5 million firearm sales in 2025 alone, generating up to $825 million in retail revenue for an industry that spends less than one percent of its revenue on conventional advertising.
• Major social video platforms and traditional media outlets prohibit paid gun ads. To bypass these bans, gun manufacturers and retailers embed themselves directly into content by sponsoring creators with free firearms, accessories, ammunition, or formal paid partnerships. This blurs the line between genuine endorsement and paid promotion. What’s more, several members of the gun industry have leveraged guntube sponsorships to reach younger, digitally native audiences.
• Financial relationships between prominent creators and the firearms industry are heavily mediated by the Leviathan Group, a specialized marketing firm. Operating as an intermediary, the firm manages a stable of creators known as the “Leviathan Tribe” to standardize pricing, place products in mainstream media, and broker sponsorships – allowing creators to claim editorial independence while functioning as paid brand spokespeople.
• Annual events such as the Gundie Awards – sponsored by major gun makers and far-right gun advocacy groups – serve as a public showcase for the industry to reward influencers who expand the market for weapons and accessories while pushing anti-gun-safety narratives.

Glorifying Violence, Extremism, and Illegal Weapons

Industry funding sponsors content that glorifies military-style assault weapons, teaches combat tactics, spreads political extremism and white supremacy, and normalizes dangerous or even illegal weapons:

• Prominent channels frequently blend firearms reviews with conspiratorial claims, anti-government rhetoric, and extremist iconography. Creators have featured -era symbols, voiced support for far-right movements calling for civil war, and promoted anti-government fearmongering. In multiple tragic instances, perpetrators of mass violence have cited watching specific guntube content prior to carrying out attacks.
• Content across the ecosystem increasingly showcases third-party conversion devices like “Glock switches” (which illegally convert pistols into fully automatic machine guns) as well as unserialized 3D-printed firearms. These videos downplay the severe public safety risks of untraceable weapons and circumvented background checks.
• While YouTube maintains policies aimed at addressing these issues, enforcement remains weak and gaps persist, allowing violative and dangerous content to remain online for months or years.

Recommendations for YouTube

To address the risks highlighted in the report, Everytown urges YouTube to move beyond written policy updates – such as its September 2026 rule barring weapons or ammunition from brand-influenced content – and take meaningful, consistent action to police firearms content. Without strict enforcement, these policy shifts will remain ineffective against an industry-funded ecosystem designed to monetize public safety risks.

Specifically, YouTube must enforce its branded content policy to sever the financial pipeline between gun manufacturers and influencers, close loopholes for undisclosed promotions, and swiftly remove content that glorifies assault weapons, teaches combat tactics, or spreads extremist rhetoric. Finally, the platform must implement age-gating and algorithmic safeguards to ensure dangerous gun content and industry marketing are completely out of reach for children and teens.

 

[ikeo1]

Link?

 

[cali_jazz]

Link?

fixing...

 

[Gawernator]

This may provide some context for YouTube’s new branded-content rules. Everytown put this out Sept. 16 specifically targeting the financial relationships between the firearms industry and “Guntubers.” What caught my attention is that they specifically cite YouTube’s September policy change prohibiting branded content involving weapons or ammunition, and they’re urging YouTube to go even further by cutting off what they describe as the financial pipeline between manufacturers and influencers.

The big unanswered question is still T&E guns. YouTube defines branded content broadly enough to include receiving “something of value,” but I haven’t found any clarification from YouTube saying whether a firearm temporarily loaned to a reviewer for an independent review counts.

If anyone has seen an actual response from YouTube specifically addressing T&E loaners, please post it.

View attachment 253744

Good God this is a screenshot for ants!

 

[Gawernator]

Read the link........ these people are evil

 

[cali_jazz]

Good god this is a screenshot for ants!

Calm down you guys, you have the site on speed-dial?! LOL.

Give a bro a minute to update!! It's after 1AM!!

 

[Gawernator]

uhhhhhh sorry Ikeo was just tucking me in for bed

 

[exnds]

The smart ones already moved on to Reddit.