3)According to YouTube FAQ section, this kind of action is automated, based upon specific words within the title or description. I assume their algorithms picked up on the word “suffering” and flagged it for that reason. The YouTube FAQ section says that you can get a human to review the decision by clicking on “request review”. But this option is grayed out and not clickable. In other words, it appears they have no interest in discussing it. The A.I. decision therefore, is final.
4)I know, I know....this pales in comparison to the level of censorship endured by others. The small, small amount of monetization isn’t the issue — I get maybe 25 bucks every other month for all the digital distribution I get for my music over all platforms such as iTunes, Spotify, Pandora, YouTube, etc. combined. So it’s not about the lack of monetization.
5)Part of me is saying that I should be glad they didn’t pull it completely. But part of me is hollering FOUL. It’s a lovely tune and an instrumental at that. I’ve done scores of tunes, including other hymns — Amazing Grace, His Eye is on the Sparrow, etc. — and those are still up with no limits. So maybe this isn’t about anti-Christian bias. But then again, it does raise the ol’ radar.
6)If I push it with YouTube, I’m not sure what the outcome would be. I might end up doing more harm than good. Seriously, I’m a nobody with a handful of very lovely supporters who like very much what I do — and I don’t want to jeopardize that.
Sorry, I’m rambling. It’s just another reminder that everyday people see and feel the affects of social media censorship — even if it’s in a very small way.
Do the old Napster thing and change the title slightly
Yeah, I've thought of that. But doing so would kick it out of any searches from folks looking for examples of that particular song.
Those who label words as violence do so with the sole purpose of justifying violence against words.