I disagree with that interpretation. It does not apply to private companies that are too small to regulate public communications. It very much applies to companies that are big enough to regulate public communications. The intent of the 1rst amendment is that speech not be censored.
The Tech oligarchs are no different than the railroads, the oil companies, the telephone company, and many other monopolies that have become out of control.
I don't care how it's done. It must be done. These corporations either need to be tamed or destroyed.
Sorry, not in the Constitution. Legislation and regulation can be the remedy if these companies are acting as a utility, and if not, they can be sued by people who are harmed by their business activities. But, too many politicians are on the take. Sucks to be us.
I don't care how it's done. It must be done. These corporations either need to be tamed or destroyed.
Remember the "The Trust Buster", Teddy Roosevelt? He used the SHERMAN ANTITRUST ACT, passed by Congress in 1890 to bust up institutions who had become obstacles to trade. He took on J. P. Morgan and won. Eventually Standard Oil was dissolved. And the list went on and on.
Fast forward to The Modified Final Judgement against AT&T administered by Judge Harold Green. It was split into AT&T Long Distance, seven separate Regional Bell Operating Companies (RBOCs) and a seperate engineering company that had been Western Electric and Bell Labs which later became Lucent. WE would all still be typing on remote green font VDTs hard connected to megalithic mainframes playing "Hunt the Wumpus" if the AT&T breakup had not happened.
It is past time that these four horsemen, Google, Youtube, Facebook, and Twitter were reined in.