Probably because Youtube was using MySQL before being acquired and switched to a better, probably fully managed DB that was much easier (free?) to maintain and scale.
This is one of those scenarios where the answer is likely to be “both”, but I doubt you’ll get anyone discussing YouTube internal architecture in enough detail to be satisfying. Just look up what Vitesse is and compare what that implies in terms of operational complexity to using something like spanner if you want a straw man technical rationale.
> How Google uses Vitess
> Vitess was serving all YouTube database traffic from 2011 to 2019.