The adpocalypse started with a YouTuber that goes by the name PewDiePie. His videos consisted of controversial content that got the attention of Wall Street Journal. WSJ later took that content to Disney studios, whom he was partnered with and in reaction to it, Disney canceled his YouTube red series and dropped him from maker studios. Journalists took this an opportunity to scrutinize this further to find that there was more questionable content that was featured in cooperation with advertisements on youtube.They took all disapproving content found, like anti-sematic YouTube channels featuring adds from big companies like Coca-Cola, Adidas, Cadbury, Starbucks and Nike and brought them to the attention of large corporations. This caused many companies to opt out off all of their ad revenue from YouTube. Since YouTube gets most of its money through advertisements, it caused YouTube started to earn a significantly lesser amount of money which in turn affected people being paid by YouTube. Companies were later given more control of picking the videos their add can appear before. The issue was videos were getting demonetized even though they shouldn’t have. Having a video with the title ‘dead’ or ‘blood’ would get demonetized even if the content did not include anything extremist. This left people with the option of either going by the newly imposed restrictions by youtube or quitting the channel.The loss of revenue incurred by Youtubers was close to 50-90% depending on their content. YouTubers had to rely on Pateron or other forms of revenues or last resort- quit. With constant flagging by YouTube, It not only affected the revenues of YouTubers but also restricts them from producing original and genuine content tailored involving their perspective that they were being paid for. In some cases, videos that just talk about news are getting flagged and demonetized. YouTubes new guidelines are more sensitive than ever. One of the main arguments behind the cause of youtube new guidelines apart from money was how content was inappropriate to children irrelevant of disclaimer. Channels with no intent of harm or extreme content were flagged or terminated on very vague grounds. is this acceptable? should YouTube have incorporated content censorship at an earlier stage?Channels are famous for the content they produce, by changing guidelines, is YouTube limiting the creativity of individuals by restricting them from producing genuine content?