Corporations don’t act on the moral principles regardless of what their PR/marketing department says. It is ultimately decided on how laws affect their bottomline.
They might try to make an example out of a smaller state, but since they aren't selling food or fuel or heart pills it isn't like the state is going to collapse without access to Meta properties.
Also because the companies are beholden to shareholders and their financial best interest. cutting off millions of clients to make a political statement is not in the companies best financial interest and would likely result in a shareholder lawsuit.
A total pull out is what big tech threatens when government is impacting on their profit margins, not working in their favour.
Big tech are going to be the ones selling the verified ID solutions and the laws are going to effectively make it mandatory. There’s a potential future where we’ll all be paying for a subscription to a verified ID system that we don’t want.
Big tech is probably lobbying for it behind our backs.
I'll answer your serious question with one of my own. What incentive would Meta, Google and friends have to "decide not to serve Arizona"?
What is the business model of these companies? To make you view ads and charge advertisers more for "targeted" ads. Having age (which ends up being ID) verification gives them more tools to "target" ads and thus can charge more for the ad space they sell.
I'd say that these folks would be among the last to fight against something like this.
And so I'll reiterate my question: What incentives do these corporations have for opposing such legislation?
I'd say zero. In fact, I'd argue that their business models incentivize them to support such legislation.
If big tech just withdraw from any market that tries to stop them, the logical conclusion is for these markets to seek alternative products. This gives the alternatives the investment and network effect they need to become more capable competitors of existing big tech products.
I would imagine the backlash from the people would fix this pretty quickly.
This seems like one of those "the enemy of my enemy is my friend" situations. I'd fully support big tech saying, "Alright Arizona. Build your own technical infrastructure."
And letting the fools in government who don't understand how the world works figure it out the hard way.
What am I missing? (beyond perhaps being overly optimistic!)