They want it both ways; to have the legal protections telcos have, and to have a tight control over their platform. This was touched on in the Congressional he

They want it both ways; to have the legal protections telcos have, and to have a tight control over their platform. This was touched on in the Congressional hearing with Mr. Zuckerberg, where he avoided the answer: SEN. TED CRUZ (R-TEX): Thank you Mr. Chairman. Mr. Zuckerberg, welcome. Thank you for being here. Mr. Zuckerberg, does Facebook consider itself a neutral public forum? ZUCKERBERG: Senator, we consider ourselves to be a platform for all ideas. CRUZ: Let me ask the question again. Does Facebook consider itself to be a neutral public forum, and representatives of your company are giving conflicting answers on this? Are you a ... ZUCKERBERG: Well ... CRUZ: ... First Amendment speaker expressing your views, or are you a neutral public forum allowing everyone to speak? ZUCKERBERG: Senator, here's how we think about this: I don't believe that — there are certain content that clearly we do not allow, right? Hate speech, terrorist content, nudity, anything that makes people feel unsafe in the community. From that perspective, that's why we generally try to refer to what we do as platform for all ideas ... CRUZ: Let me try this, because the time is constrained. It's just a simple question. The predicate for Section 230 immunity under the CDA is that you're a neutral public forum. Do you consider yourself a neutral public forum, or are you engaged in political speech, which is your right under the First Amendment. ZUCKERBERG: Well, senator, our goal is certainly not to engage in political speech. I am not that familiar with the specific legal language of the — the law that you — that you speak to. So I would need to follow up with you on that. I'm just trying to lay out how broadly I think about this.