This happens much more regularly than most people know. Everyday I see moderates and conservatives sharing screenshots of very reasonable posts that resulted in

This happens much more regularly than most people know. Everyday I see moderates and conservatives sharing screenshots of very reasonable posts that resulted in past account suspensions or bans, or post-specific censorship, content flags ("missing context"), etc. In most cases they are given no reason other than a vague claim of violating 'community standards'. The net effect is that one side of many controversial topics has little representation and exposure. When foreign powers distort societal discourse, we call it "propaganda". We need to start using that same label when tech companies do this. Part of this is enabled by the hyperbolic language used to justify censorship. "Hate speech" is really just code for "speech that disagrees with the progressive left". The reason these policies are written they way they are and enforced the way they are, is because these companies have employees and leaders that are biased, who brought their own political biases into the workplace. If a company is mission-oriented and tries to represent the interests of all customers, they would take a different approach that is more balanced. But at this point I don't think a small clique of urban West Coast companies can be trusted with the kind of power they have. The solution is to regulate social media as a common carrier, because it is a basic essential service in the modern world: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_media_as_a_public_utility https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_media_as_a_public_utili...