it’s not just “not as bad” it’s categorically a different thing

they’re easy categories: government enforced censorship (ie lose your freedom for disobeying) vs private businesses’ editorial discretion (ie just get your news from another company)

Just because you outsource censorship to tech companies to get around the 1A doesn't mean it's not censorship.

The "muh private companies" argument ended long ago when government officials started using it as their main platform and we applied archive rules and prevented Trump from blocking people: https://www.wsj.com/articles/president-trump-cant-block-twit...

You can't have it both ways. Let's investigate why they all decided at once to block it right before the election. Are they coordinating? Let's find out. Seems like an anti-trust issue.

Point is, it's censorship, no matter how much people try to weasel out of it.

Go get the laws changed then, not sure what to tell you if you don’t agree that there are significant differences between the state and private business - free speech as defined by our constitution is rather specific. Complaining about it on the internet won’t change that.

We're talking about ideals not legality, what is and isn't censorship.

It's legal in Russia to do what Putin is doing, that doesn't make it not censorship.

But yes, we're working on it, it starts with public discussion and communicating with our representatives, which I and others do.