The financial incentives are completely different, it's all about the money. YouTube is sensitive to public opinion because advertisers are sensitive to public opinion and they are the only way YouTube makes any money. Hosting companies are incentivized NOT to care about the type of content being hosted because this approach makes them more money. Further, paying for a service usually implies some guarantees about services rendered and discourages capricious enforcement of business policies.
I used to think that, but Cloudflare de-platforming Daily Stormer[0] is a counter example to your claim. I still maintain twitter mobs can pressure any private company to de-platform speech they don't like.
This is not a typical situation. If you're a certain type of asshole very few people are going to want to do business with you, this can't be helped, but there is always someone out there willing to do the job if there's money to be made.
However, I will add that I don't disagree about your fundamental premise with respect to corporate ownership of the internet and I support the idea of publicly owned or decentralized spaces on the internet.
