[semimojo]

fb, twitter, youtube, apple, et al, all claim to be open platforms open to anyone and everyone.

Not quite.

Just like FR, anyone can register and use the platforms provided they don't post things the owner doesn't want on the site.

Sure, your list of unacceptable views may be longer and more explicit, but all of those other services have the same right to exclude views they don't like that you do.

I'm not arguing that it's right, just saying that it will be very hard to come up with a standard that restrains them but not FR.

[Trumpisourlastchance]

These are monopolized forums in which the public communicates, and they designed it to be so.

[Jim Robinson]

Sure they do. That’s the free market. Socialists, liberal progressives, globalists, abortionists, homosexualists, antisemites, islamofascists, big government pushers, etc, will be attracted to their platforms and will fit right in. Judeo-Christian conservatives not so much.

[DiogenesLamp]

I'm not arguing that it's right, just saying that it will be very hard to come up with a standard that restrains them but not FR.

The standard is easy: "Market Share."

When you get to be a major portion of the market, your ability to restrict content should be constrained.

[faucetman]

“...it will be very hard to come up with a standard that restrains them but not FR. “

Ridiculous! FR is not GOOGLE or FACEBOOK.

Listen at INFOWARS and see how the “private company” excuse is demolished.