2 ms·

I find it rather depressing that you would be espousing regulations that hurt freedom (of Google, in this case). Please rethink your logic here.

• adventured 8y ago
  I'm hyper socially liberal and when it comes to economics I very broadly support free market policies. If all of the major platforms - monopolies - for social media and general media reach are aggressively conspiring to limit speech based on politics, what you have is not anything resembling freedom. You have censorship in fact. Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, Reddit, Google search = near universal platform control by one political ideology (which they've all admitted to over the years), which is now very openly censoring the right wing of politics. The coordinated censorship isn't subtle, they're almost flaunting it at this point. It's an extremely dangerous concentration of power into one politically aligned monopoly set of corporations. We're seeing the results of that now, as the desire to directly control and influence politics kicks into gear. If a platform has a very large monopoly position, then they should be legally forced open as a direct pass-through consequence of the first amendment. They should be required to allow all speech (that doesn't involve threats of violence, which isn't speech), or give up their monopoly position.