Only governments censor, what you're talking about is editorial policy. However, Zuck doesn't want to risk Facebook's §230 protection which is the door that the

Only governments censor, what you're talking about is editorial policy. However, Zuck doesn't want to risk Facebook's §230 protection which is the door that the hammerers are behind. It's not a Pandora's box, though, because these laws have been around for decades and centuries. But they don't want to, they haven't built the tools to do so, and they make money from it. It's the same as their rationale around moderation in general: "well we built this to be wide open and have zero tools to control it, and now it's just too complicated to do so!" It's like building a car without brakes and saying "Look, congressperson, we're in the business of helping people get to wherever they want to go. We don't think it's our place to dictate the speed of travel, and there are many companies making brakes for these cars, for people who want them. Competition!"