Dmitry “Goblin” Puchkov, a Russian blogger known for his video content, faced removal from a major video hosting platform when his channel, which accumulated over 3 million subscribers, was blocked. At the moment of the block, visitors attempting to reach the main page were met with a message stating that the page does not exist. Telegram communities reported that the takedown was linked to breaches of the platform’s community guidelines.
Around mid-year, on June 9, another channel belonging to Russian pranksters known publicly as Vovan (Vladimir Kuznetsov) and Lexus (Alexey Stolyarov) was deleted by the same platform. Earlier, on May 24, the channel of a Russian editor associated with Russia Today faced a block.
On May 9, the press office head of the state corporation Roscosmos, Dmitry Strugovets, stated that YouTube had removed all videos featuring Roscosmos personnel Dmitry Rogozin from the Roscosmos Media channel. He noted that roughly two dozen videos, collectively gathering about 5 million views, were taken down from the channel. (Source: YouTube announcements)
These removals illustrate a period when several prominent channels tied to political content and government-affiliated organizations experienced enforcement actions on the platform. The changes affected content creators across multiple genres, including political commentary, investigative coverage, and space industry reporting. (Attribution: YouTube policy updates)
In some cases, the blocks appeared to target specific videos rather than entire channels, while in others the channel itself was disabled. The outcomes varied: some channels reported reinstatement after appeals, others remained inaccessible. The exact reasons cited by the platform often referenced violations of community standards, which encompassed a range of policies from misinformation to harassment and incitement. (Source: Platform policy documents)
For audiences, these developments meant a sudden loss of access to familiar voices and a shift in where viewers could find certain types of content. Content creators responded with clarifications about policy interpretations, while watchers explored alternative platforms or mirrored content to preserve access. Industry observers noted that the enforcement actions underscored the ongoing tensions between platform governance, editorial independence, and national discourse, particularly during periods of heightened geopolitical sensitivity. (Attribution: industry analysis reports)