I thought EFF was finally over the decades of acting as though only government demanded censorship matters? Here it sounds like they're singing the old song.

I thought EFF was finally over the decades of acting as though only government demanded censorship matters? Here it sounds like they're singing the old song. Content I've written was censored when others shared it on Facebook-- e.g. the essay accompanying the release of 30GB of previously paywalled JSTOR documents (https://thepiratebay.gd/torrent/6554331/Papers_from_Philosophical_Transactions_of_the_Royal_Society__fro https://thepiratebay.gd/torrent/6554331/Papers_from_Philosop...), was silently hidden from the receiver when people tried sharing it on Facebook. I doubt any government asked them to do this-- especially considering how fast it was suppressed. Focusing only on government "requested" censorship likely ignores even the majority of government _induced_ censorship: Consider the censorship executed through soft power like a fear displeasing the powers that be and that resulting in less favorable policy or the loss of lucrative contracts. Not to mention censorship which occurs for merely private economic gains-- which might be tolerable in a true private space; but should not be tolerated in places which serve the social role online of public forums and common carriers. Is it beneficial to the public to mark facebook down for denying inmates access, when presumably this is just belt-and-suspenders on top of physical control of the inmates, while not carefully exploring the other kinds of censorship they and their competitors in the pseudo-public-forum business engage in?