>>>Any time you exercise any type of editorial authority on your “platform” you’re a “publisher.”
Since FR has admins exercising editorial authority, then FR would appear to be a publisher.
If that’s the case, then yes.
Some thoughts to the contrary
Compare/contrast this reality with• FR is privately held
• FR has plenty of competition, and the cost of entry to competitors is low. Competitive sites can be built on Wordpress for free in mere hours
• The likelihood of FR offering material assistance to any candidate over another is low
• FR moderation, while sometimes inconsistently applied, is aimed at preventing its own copyright entanglements with content publishers/creators and with enforcing the site rules
• FR moderation is (generally) applied equally to all posters
• Monopolistic social media platforms
• Offering in-kind support and hand-picked winners to national and international politicians representing a narrow viewpoint
• No accounting of this in-kind support
• Consistently penalizing (shadow-banning/banning) select viewpoints
• Discrimination against viewpoints without making this discrimination clear to shareholders or 'users'
I'm in favor of an EO banning Fed government entities from utilizing these platforms. Imagine the horror of local governments having to build their own platforms to share messaging with citizens– because once the Feds go away, why bother?