Wasn't YouTube acting as an authority on what was truthful or harmful content on their platforms and inserting warnings or (de)monetizing accordingly in the ver

Wasn't YouTube acting as an authority on what was truthful or harmful content on their platforms and inserting warnings or (de)monetizing accordingly in the very recent past? If they're evaluating at least some content for either accuracy, compliance, or veracity, then the implication is that content that isn't warned against is "trusted". I'd argue that if YoutTube is going to inject opinions on trustworthiness of information, they should make it clear what content they're evaluating and what they're not so people don't make the mistake of assuming YouTube is a reliable source of information.