Maybe it would help to criticize the criticism. I think the current criticism is way oversimplified. It's not a social media problem per se. It's the current im

Maybe it would help to criticize the criticism. I think the current criticism is way oversimplified. It's not a social media problem per se. It's the current implementation and monetization of it. We have always had social media of some kind, even before the printing press. It is critical to democracy. We have even had an entity inserting themselves in between the speaker and the listener, filtering the discussion for their own benefit and using their own standards. That used to be newspapers, but now it's Facebook. The difference is the filtering standard is now centralized by very few entities, basically Facebook and Twitter. Whatever standard they employ basically amounts to centralized information planning. Whatever is the resulting harm becomes greatly magnified. In the past if a few editors were causing harm to democracy in one direction or another, that harm was limited in scope. Now the devastation is total. Because the players have 100% coverage. A breakup of some kind over this monopoly seems necessary now, before it becomes impossible.