FFS, in the past political speech would be rejected by all sorts of publishers. This isn't a new issue.

Just as folk were then free to set up their own press to churn out leaflets, so too are folk now free to host their own content. In fact, the situation is probably a lot brighter now.

Considering that there's no constitutional basis for even applying due process to the private sector, I think you're going to have a hard time convincing anyone that's a good idea.

How does whether the law supports something influence whether modifying the law is a good idea or not?