It's one thing to oppose Trump. It's another when you control 80-90% of search traffic and you are banning certain people (moreso on the conservative side) and

It's one thing to oppose Trump. It's another when you control 80-90% of search traffic and you are banning certain people (moreso on the conservative side) and are biasing search results etc.. These companies were able to grow to the size they are because of safe harbor. The idea behind safe harbor was that it was for the public good IF the platforms stayed neutral. If you are a progressive, you can openly talk about your political views at these companies, but if you are are a Trump supporter or a conservative you have to be underground or face being purged. This company ideology has made it's way into the products that they offer with Twitter and Facebook and Google banning accounts, shadow banning results etc. based on subjective criteria. In the mobile space for example, both Google and Apple can effectively shut you down by banning you from the app stores. The lack of trust busting finally bit the republicans in the butt which is why their acting, but fixing this is a good thing. As much as this may allow some people with ideas I find extremely repulsive to spread those ideas, the alternative is a group of people who are un-accountable to the public filtering those views in ways that are very difficult for the average person to detect. That is giving way too much power to a select group of people. As history has shown power corrupts which is why we need to the checks and balances. Before Citizens United there was another check and balance in the system because that bias would have been considered an "in kind" political donation. From a startup perspective this is also a good thing because in certain verticals these big players have the ability to squash upstarts, buy out their staff etc..