Right now there are two primary type of services. A publisher and a platform. Social medias claim they're neither and does not need to conform to either types of services which is what they're lobbying for.
A publisher needs to check every word that is published which can't be done by social media. Yet in Europe that is what they're attempting to have social media's conform to.
In my opinion they're platforms. As such many politicians use their services to express their positions on issues and citizens can respond. Which means they can't be regulated other then the braking of state laws.
Again, social media's what to be neither. I personally get shadow banned while talking with congressional people in these forums. They shouldn't be allowed to take down opinions on a political platform. Unless there is a law broken.
What law are they getting around? Publishers check words for accuracy so as to not engage in libel. A news paper cannot be held to libel or defamation standards for opinion pieces. And the certainly are not accountable for oped pieces by readers.
Jim is not accountable for all the nonsense, lies, and misleading crap you find here. Jim can also ban any of us. Good for Jim and good for Facebook.