I'll take a shot, I haven't thought on this too long, but here it goes. Over the past few years, I think we've seen a lot of the downsides of completely unmode

I'll take a shot, I haven't thought on this too long, but here it goes. Over the past few years, I think we've seen a lot of the downsides of completely unmoderated social media. Regardless of political affiliation, I don't think I know a single person who thinks the current state of social media is healthy. With the right technologies and budget it's shockingly easy to spread misinformation, propaganda, and hateful rhetoric that will be picked up and taken to heart by some percentage of the population. That's may not be the only reason people find social media to be unhealthy in its current state, but it's definitely one of the top reasons. So, with that being said, it feels like some sort of moderation is needed. With moderation comes the idea that someone will also need to be the arbiter of truth. I'm not a huge fan of having a few social media companies fill that arbiter of truth role, but honestly, I don't have a better option. I don't think this is a perfect solution and it can definitely be abused, but I do think it's an attempt to solve a clear problem. I'd rather see them do something to try and fix it and deal with any new issues as they arise instead of just sitting back and pretending like it can't be fixed or that it isn't a problem.