This idea of whether platforms should be a commons is interesting because it's an artifact of the early internet "common carrier" designation for ISPs, and then

This idea of whether platforms should be a commons is interesting because it's an artifact of the early internet "common carrier" designation for ISPs, and then the platforms got section 230 in the communications decency act. The idea becomes important again when people defect from the platforms and just start using new protocols. Right now, I'd agree from a free speech perspective that the platforms are publishers and if they are going to censor unpopular or controversial views, they should also be liable for the illegal content on their sites. If they aren't liable for it, then they can't censor anything more than bots without risking that liability. Imo, the next big argument will likely be whether there is a difference between a platform and a protocol as well.