They are private companies but pretending that they are not censoring politically. They also push the Dem party candidates while pretending they don’t. So from what I read they are illegally being more or less political supporting orgs pretending they aren’t.
They Legally, they can be a platform or a publisher. If they edit or censor content, other than for breaking the law, they're a publisher and open to libel suits.
lj commented, “So from what I read they are illegally being more or less political supporting orgs pretending they aren’t.”
generally posted, “I want the media as free from propaganda and censorship as possible... and I don’t want it so free that there are ads for child trafficking, etc.”
AZLiberty suggested, “Legally, it’s not censorship if a private individual or company does it — it’s just editorial oversight.”
************************
Censorship and propaganda vs editorial oversight...
Whether a privately or publicly owned entity, editorial oversight has shifted from common and decent human sense to the use of algorithms.
I have no expertise in writing computer code, so I suppose this is necessitated by the sheer volume of internet communication.
That then leads me to ponder what has happened in the media... there seems to be little to no decency remaining in applying editorial oversight as most of it outright reeks of propaganda and censorship.
To my fellow FReeQs, thank you for taking the time to share with me your common sense and decency.