Firstly, from my point of view they're already heavily censoring content via their algorithm. Facebook hides posts that decrease engagement and amplifies posts

Firstly, from my point of view they're already heavily censoring content via their algorithm. Facebook hides posts that decrease engagement and amplifies posts that increase engagement. If the argument for absolute free speech is that misinformation should be fought with information (meaning, if some folks are telling people to drink bleach as a cure for covid, the remedy is to tell those same people not to drink bleach, and let the people decide for themselves), that's impossible what with Facebooks algorithmic censorship. It's nearly impossible to reach those people, and it's not even possible to even hear what argument they're receiving in order to rebut. Secondly, in terms of liberty, Facebook is a company doing what they feel they need to do. What course of action, aside from government intervention, would prevent them from removing posts they thought were harmful? What would be the threshold for the government to intervene in a web service's moderation policy?