And who is the arbiter of "right"? Does this boil down to just "I don't agree with what meta is doing"?

Ideally, each individual, with society deciding via laws and regulation when people disagree.

> Does this boil down to just "I don't agree with what meta is doing"?

No, this boils down to "it is bad for even billionaires to be terrified of opposing the new President". Who has, for the record, previously called for Zuck's imprisonment.

That's a total 180 from the OP and most of this comment thread, which was seemingly about excoriating meta/zuck's behavior.

I think him feeling like he has to be is terrifying.

It would be one thing if Meta content teams sat down, thought about it, and decided that abortion pills aren't something they're comfortable having on their platform. But then they wouldn't have restored accounts when the New York Times started asking. It looks a lot more like an unprincipled decision to make their lives a bit easier by putting their thumbs on the scale against views the government doesn't like. (It's not like they've never done that before!)