And which political movement is it that you think is being suppressed?
I don't think there's a win here for facebook as it currently stands. They can't let unfettered bullshit keep happening, and they can't truly moderate without becoming arbiters of some truth they've decided.
When they are the largest company in this space, and they apply their moral compass, I guess you're just assuming that moral compass points to where you want to go?
I only ever see it being offered as a 'theoretical' by conservatives who think they are being 'shadow banned' or 'cancelled'.
Do only conservatives worry about the consolidation of traditional media [1], too? Or is that something others, besides conservatives, also worry about, and is therefore a legitimate concern, unlike the consolidation of social networks?
What about the other way around - if only liberals complain about something, and not conservatives, do you also use that to dismiss the concerns?
[1] https://www.webfx.com/blog/internet/the-6-companies-that-own...
Corporations are typically run by the type of person that will do whatever they can to maximize profits and the central theme of her testimony is that the 'anything we can do to make money' drive is the core issue.
Facebook turns a blind eye to things that will impact their engagement numbers and increasing new users.
Which, as Matt points out in his article, isn't an issue except for the sheer scale of Facebook.
For me the factor complicating is that you can't 'solve' the problem here because the core problem is the drive to maximize profits and increase users at all costs. Any corporate structure is going to run a social media company in the same fashion. And will build up to the size of Facebook if it is allowed to do so.
SO you can't 'fix' it