I'm going to try this again.  Let's say you have a library. It's a big library, the world can access... it has these different rooms.  You're the librarian @jana

One of the rooms is full of images... all kinds of images. You can search in the room and find all kinds of images, associated with the topic you are researching.  It's marvelous.

Then one day, you go into this room in the library and 99.9% of the images are gone.  Would you not ask, why?

I'm suggesting, evaluating what's been left to be accessible, will lead you to understanding.

And by the way, the other rooms in the library has also been altered, it's just harder to see. 

The easiest way to see the situation in all the rooms, is via the situation in the image room, at least this is what I've been able to discern. This is why I have been pointing to these images for at least ten years.

Am I in a situation where I am the only person who thinks the disappearance of all the images, means something?  Or matters?

I think there are a multitude of things at play. I am not any sort of expert on this topic, but here's what I theorize:

1. Image search is free for the user. There is an energy cost to the provider, and they give the service to us for free, for whatever reasons. Initially it was a quality service. Now, as the internet has become more expansive, and it costs the provider more and more energy to go through everything - I would guess that there is some cost savings to limit their search to a certain section of the internet, and filter out the rest. It's also likely there is some cost benefit to include some sites instead of others. They can program it however they want, and their motive is to generate revenue. (I don't know the history of public libraries, but I'd be interested to know the similarities and differences with the search functions on the internet, of how they were formed and how they get funded. )

2. People/companies who want their content to show up in global image searches have manipulated the algorithms, and ruined the landscape for everyone else. Obviously.

3. People have changed how they share images online. Many used to upload personal photography onto self-hosted sites, back in the day. Now, with the ease of sharing photos through social media, most mom and pop photos are funneled through these sites, where the content creators can have some form of control over who sees their content. Even if it's a false sense of privacy, most regular people do not want their intimate gatherings or photos of their kids, to show up in a global image search. I know I personally changed my photo sharing habits as the internet has evolved. When boomers joined facebook, that was the end of an era. User habits are in a feedback loop with the technology.

4. The image search service provider has reason to protect themselves legally. Why would they continue to share content without limits when users are likely to weaponize the service against others? Easier not to get tangled up in lawsuits when serious controversy stems from an image that shows up in the search. Yes it's censorship, but refer to point #1.