Ok so if a court system is what matters why do you support abusive censorship from private platforms that go well beyond what the law typically requires.
Their platform. As long as they are transparent on what they are doing, they should be free to do this. You are also free to not use it.
Being deceptive is more questionable than doing your own censorship on your own platform.
Removing things you don't like without justification while claiming your platform is freedom-land would be much more problematic. Same with shady algorithm favouring specific content without transparency.
And yet the twitter files shows an interesting case, what you posit as the platform executing their own will (their platform), was in fact heavily influenced by government threats of removal of section 230 protections. Platforms should be free from undemocratic, top down influence from our highest officials, surely you would agree?
That would skew platforms far to the right from their current (2020-2024) political leanings though.
have you actually read the twitter files? doubt that you did and also wrote this comment. you can also just read the above-the-fold part of the link you provided ... :)
Here is a better link, woth direct quotes of the source material, that back up my claim. An editorialized wikipedia article written by people who do not want the story to be true was not a good choice on my part. My apologies. I'd also suggest listening to Mark Zuckerberg's appearance on JRE if you want to get info from the horse's mouth so to speak.
Mark Zuckerberg made big claims but unfortunately he didn't provide proof, no trails of relevant threats. He blamed left for his own communication during covid but at that time Trump was at the Whitehouse. That sudden change from Zuckerberg may not be entirely motivated by genuine freedom of speech support.
