I agree with the sarcasm here, but I must elaborate on how terrible a person Mr. Hedges is. There's a whole saga behind how he went from being a noted journalist to whining on Substack, and I've been tracking it for quite some time.
* First came the plagiarism revelations, which are detailed quite nicely here: https://newrepublic.com/article/118114/chris-hedges-pulitzer...
* Then came the self-plagiarism revelations (many of his Truthdig columns are rewarmed passages from his books). He's apparently also been editing his own Wikipedia page to remove critism, and at one point got into an edit war with another longstanding contributor. All the while, he's called Wikipedia a "tool of the elite". https://twitter.com/Mathlover2/status/1499650487481683968?s=...
* Finally, we have his aforementioned show on RT. While it may not be on YouTube, it's still very much available on rt.com, which I can access from the US as of this writing, and which allows people to download individual episodes.
I'm hopeful this gimmick on which they've wasted vast resources is obviously bunk to almost everyone, at least in America. Even here in Portland, it would only spare you a few minutes before your lynching if you said you worked for RT rather than for Fox News.
“We are what we pretend to be.”
In all honesty though - RT banned YouTube, and YouTube banned RT. Why would one be ok and the other not?
The reason one would be okay and the other wouldn't be is, to the extent that RT is a "private" enterprise, it's their right to determine what content is on their own platform, just as it's Youtube's right to determine what content is on theirs. It is not the government's right (in a free society) to determine what sites citizens can or cannot access.
RT's actual website with videos is still available in America.