You're completely ignoring network effects i.e., the mob - the main reason to regulate social media - and the telephone doesn't have that, so it's not a good comparison.

> Facebook is a tool

...and so are its users. In any case: people are arguing specifically that the negatives outweigh the positives. While that is obviously subjective and debatable, there really isn't any argument defending Facebook under the assumption that they are net negative.

In fact, there is a rather long list of precedent. That's why you can't really enrich uranium even if it would make a really cool necklace.

In a free society we don't prohibit certain activities just because a vocal minority dislikes them. The bar for coercive control and regulation needs to be a lot higher than that.

I hope we've all read Taleb's thoughts on "The Most Intolerant Wins: The Dictatorship of the Small Minority"[0], you'd be surprised how much influence vocal minorities appear to have in our "free" societies.

[0]https://medium.com/incerto/the-most-intolerant-wins-the-dict...

>While that is obviously subjective and debatable, there really isn't any argument defending Facebook under the assumption that they are net negative.

That assumption is very much the point of contention here.