But Facebook isn't a monopoly. Nor is it a press outlet. Nor is that what you were talking about in your previous message. You were likening hate speech to free speech. I was saying that it's not a free speech issue as long as the speech is about the government. Speech that affects other citizens isn't the same thing.
Then, we were talking about Rotten Tomatoes having the right to remove anything from their website that affects the bottom line. Just like your blog doesn't have to publish left wing articles, Rotten tomatoes doesn't have you include or mention any outlets or scores they don't want to.
To your completely unrelated point about Facebook and the social media oligopoly I have a few questions and comments.
Where did Facebook ever say they were fair and balanced?
In fact, how could one insinuate anything of a "fair and balanced nature" of a platform with 2 billion people on it adding content to it 24 hours a day that exists to make money for its shareholders?
What would you see done about the oligopoly of social media and big tech companies. I think the only options are grassroots campaigns to show the problems with these networks and importance of supporting smaller alternatives OR government intervention which would force these companies to break up. I'd love to hear other solutions though.
Based on your original post you're most concerned with allowing places for hate speech to flourish unchecked. Luckily there are alternatives for that already like Gab: https://steemit.com/cryptocurrency/@cryptonewslife/gab-censorship-proof-free-speech-social-media-network
Ultimately, social media isn't "free." Nor is it a public utility. We all pay for it with our attention to ads and our freely given ideas and data. The platforms are owned by people who let us use them and who can ban people as they see fit or manipulate what is inputted into their networks.
RE: Black Panther Sucks (and More)