These private companies have protections that allowed them to get big in the first place Tom. That's because they were to be a platform that ANYONE can use without fear of litigation. The phone company doesn't cut you off when have different thoughts than the CEO. The phone company doesn't cut you off when you tell grandma what's happening in your town during an election and it puts a black cloud over their favorite pedo candidate.

There should be certain protections for companies like these, so that free speech isn't suppressed. I certainly wouldn't want the heads of Mingle to be held liable for a "bad date" gone wrong - but if these companies are going to make it a one way street, I don't see the purpose of the protections anymore.

And for companies to coordinate to squish another company is far too much power to hold. Free market is getting killed and monopolies are created - which isn't good for anybody.....and in this case, resulting in the town square to be an echo chamber instead of a place to discuss - because there is no other place. People are trying to move the town square and these companies are powerful enough to disallow moving it.

Progress will always be stifled when there is no discussion, which is also not good for a society as a whole.

Armchair politicians? Really?
To point out what's wrong is not armchairing. Discussing problems and discussing solutions is not armchairing. There are people here with purdy mouths that like to get his panties in a bunch - but nobody here claims to be an expert..

Some people here will still be making excuses as to why it's ok to deny some people their human rights when the "Re-education" camps open.

Some people here will still be making excuses as to why it's ok to deny some people their human rights when the "Re-education" camps open.

As far as I know phone conversations are still private.
This means that company's 'product' is not affecting their public image.
Social media is not private. Its public.
Their 'product' and their company/corporate image directly affects their success. Censorship is required to maintain their public profile so, just like M2, they have their own rules governing the conduct of their members.
The TOS (Terms of Service) and your agreement is what gives them the 'right' to censor anything they do not agree with.
Nobody is 'forced' to use social media. Anyone can leave a social media site when they please. Nobody is 'forced' to read or participate in social media.
Thinking otherwise is delusional.

Monopolies have been around since way before this generation and will continue to happen until money and power are no longer society's motivators.

People are reactive. Society is a reactive state of mind. Utopias can't exist in a reactive state. While a person can be sane, people are insane. No group of people can be in full unity.

Pointing out what is wrong without offering a plausible solution is arm-chairing. Sitting in an arm chair and complaining about things which have no plausible solution fixes nothing.
Its like sitting on your sofa while your house is on fire complaining about it being too hot.
We caught our house on fire a long time ago and we still sit on the sofa complaining about it.
Where's the sense in that?
My solution was to step out in the yard with a big stick and just roast some marshmallows. There is no plausible fix. Its too far gone. Let it burn and maybe my kids or grand kids can build a new house after I'm dead and gone.

No one ever 'claims' to be an expert but many think they are an 'authority'.

You have to agree and identify as to the problem, before finding the solution

I love when you repeat yourself with that purdy, purdy mouth

The problem is, nobody can actually agree on what the problem is.
While some people can identify a specific problem, there are more problems than one so agreement can't actually occur.

In a perfect society unity corrects problems as they happen but this is not a perfect society, is it? The participants have fallen asleep at the wheel a long time ago. The problems multiply and now have many layers. Fixing it is no longer a viable solution.

You have problematic societies forming a global society based on problematic societies. This can only result in a problematic global society.
Since no single society posesses full unity, there is no baseline for a goal.

Don't flatter yourself, Tom.
That wasn't for you

No. but in order to form a harmonious society, there has to be common ground. The country was founded in freedom, and the laws of the country were formed in Judeo-Christian beliefs. Now that there has been a somewhat successful attempt to route those beliefs into government instead of God, perhaps there is no common ground to find anymore. Certain people aren't oppressed enough to know what freedom is, because they are towing the line (for now) - but the check is in the mail, and all the idiots that lack foresight have no idea why fields were covered in red, not that long ago.