It's time to realize that woke left, the folks whose displeasure internal to Google and external to it are causing unrest, don't hold free speech in high regard. That is not a smear but a fact. So unless there is a major cultural shift in the millennials, there isn't going to be a struggle -- just a push towards "correct thinking". Theorists like Marcuse say that those on the wrong side of the revolution don't deserve to have their views aired.
in short, i think there's a lot of extremely disruptive & chaotic uses of platforms & platforms have no obligation to host discord & chaos & madness. trying to suss out where the line is is hard, and sites do sometimes fail, sometimes acknowledged & fixed & sometimes not. but i don't see this as systematic, i don't see it as suppressive. most views are expressible.
people need to be able to set up their own spaces & stop being so angry & distraught they get kicked off of places that don't want to host their brand of speech. sites have a right to govern themselves, to select, and there should be no problem, no constraint about that: people need to be able to host themselves, host each other, become the alternatives they want to see. people could do that, could make their own spaces, there's nothing in the slightest preventing alternatives from arising, but it feels like outrage & indignation is the popular response, not taking action. we're too bound up, we care too much what individual sites do.
> there's nothing in the slightest preventing alternatives from arising
Except network effects? This assures that the incumbent platforms are those who decide which users & views are "chaos & madness", while others remain mostly irrelevant.
