How about if a human being is suspended or banned from social media at any time, that person should know why.
Why make snowflake pols a protected class?
Gov-issued Social media licenses aren't a thing - excepting dictatorial-leaning countries like the UAE.
Introducing them would be a very Big Gov thing to do.
Giving Govs unconstitutional power over everyone's speech seems like a poor solution to the problem of corporations that wield too much power over us.
> Giving Govs unconstitutional power over everyone's speech
Could you elaborate on how would adding checks on social media platform operations would compromise everyone's speech? Looking at standards set by gun regulations, I can't agree about unconstitutionality either.
I don't need to.
Congress shall make no law ... abridging the freedom of speech
The Constitution declares that Gov can't compel or restrict speech. Not even if that effort is labeled as 'adding checks'.
> I believe that we are losing ability to combat harm done by mega-corporations in general
Sure. This has always been the case. Monopolies, duopolies, anti-consumer collusion, etc is all anti-capitalistic. An historically effective measure against those types of anti-capitalistic corporate behavior is to break up those corps.
As far as the ongoing harm done to the public interest by major corps in general, that's mostly beyond what I'm looking to get into, ATM.
> if a candidate for office is suspended or banned from social media during an election, the public needs to know why, and and the candidate needs a process to appeal the decision
In a case like this company should be investigated (same way as a foreign agent meddling in elections), potentially fined and denied a licence to operate as a social media.