[Mariner]

Neither Facebook or Twitter have a monopoly on the dissemination of information.

Therefore their censorship is their business, nobody else’s.

If you don’t like what they do, unsubscribe. If you do not, you MUST like what they do. There is no other explanation.

[E. Pluribus Unum]

At what point do they become a “public accommodation?”

Or is “public accommodation” a one-way street?

[libstripper]

Right now Facebook is facing a massive loss of value. Strange how that seems to follow massive disclosures of how it censors its content. The NFL seems to be facing a similar “coincidence” regarding its kneeling anti-American players and massively dropping attendance and viewing. Looks to me like that wonderful thing, the free market, is making its judgments and assessing its penalties.

[YogicCowboy]

Those are the words of what I now call a Cookie-Cutter Conservative: a simplistic rationalization based upon the myth that we - with many thousands of regulations strangling small husinesses, and with many thousands of leftist bureaucrats oppressing the rights of citizens - have a free market.

These two are publicly-traded companies [IPO = Initial PUBLIC Offering: not private!], with an openly-solicited consumer base, from which active users they derive profit, and to whom they post official terms of service.

Selectively and deceitfully enforcing the terms of service is consumer fraud.

Deliberately enacting policies that lower market share value for stockholders is fiscal malfeasance.

Both of those are legally actionable (perhaps not winnable in today’s world of leftist lawfare and activist judges - but that is a separate issue.) If you do not like consumers and stockholders to have any legal recourse in the case of corporate abuse, then lobby for legislation to that effect.

Meanwhile, spare those of us who actually live in the real world from sanctimonious claptrap.