The better approach is to challenge FaceBook and Twitter censorship on the grounds that they have in fact created an electronic public forum that must be open to other viewpoints, just as even privately owned and sidewalks and public squares must be open to all points of view under existing Supreme Court precedent.
Google's malpractice could be addressed through Federal Trade Commission and Federal Communications Commission complaints and rulemaking so as to bar political viewpoint discrimination. Federal legislation to that effect is also in order.
. . . and instantly forthcoming from the upcoming Congress
</sarcasm> Two of the conservatives on SCOTUS have direct experience of the extreme Democrat partisanship of pseudo-objective journalism. And none of the others are likely to have enjoyed the spectacle of the opposition to the Kavanaugh confirmation. The question, it seems to me, is how SCOTUS could craft a ruling which delegitimates claims of journalistic objectivity and any and every manifestation of government respect for such claims.
Claims of objectivity are inherently self-negating because belief in your own objectivity is the essence of subjectivity. And joining a mutual admiration society which will claim objectivity for you provided you claim objectivity for everyone else in the society is simply a device for indirectly claiming objectivity for yourself.