Not naming him is a special kind of cowardice and social engineering. Either you report the news or you don't. If half a million people have seen the video, what is the point of not naming him? And while I don't condone anything the Christchurch shooter did, his manifesto only represents "hate" from one certain perspective; what about all the other hateful manifestos written from other perspectives? Who is in charge of making decisions at YouTube about which manifestos are poison, and which are okay?A Popular YouTuber Read the Christchurch ‘Manifesto’ to Half a Million Subscribers
Since they don't want to name him, it's ChuckE2009:
The manifesto reading:
They're deleting my channel video:
This kind of hide-your-head-in-the-sand approach to this very real issue of social media's role in helping disseminate the very information it claims to suppress will lead to no good outcome for anybody on any side...