If Jim controlled 98% of ALL INFORMATION SHARED IN THE WORLD, then yes, it would be virtual information UTILITY.
(Google/Youtube + FB + Twitter etc.)
If Jim controlled 98% of the DRINKING WATER IN THE WORLD, I would be against him charging $1,000 a gallon for his enemies and one cent a gallon for his friends.
Even though it was a “private business.”
Is this really a hard concept to understand, an information monopoly that is heavily slanted against conservatives?
I would too but what I'm asking is what's the standard that lets the government force him to lower his price.
Is this really a hard concept to understand, an information monopoly that is heavily slanted against conservatives?
I'm on FB maybe once a month. Somehow I manage to get information anyway.
The real issue is people want to continue to make money by publishing their information - for free - on someone else's platform and when they get cut off they cry censorship.