True. But those companies are monopolies that have been largely unregulated by the government. Zuckerberg was called in front of the Senate and House this week. He was asked about discriminating against conservatives, including Diamond and Silk.
There are laws against discrimination. If Google and Facebook don't want to provide a fair and balanced social platform the government may decide to regulate.
Diamond and Silk were severely curtailed on Facebook for "being a danger to the community". Zuckerberg wisely said that he has 20,000 "checkers" in Silicon Valley, a very liberal place and that he would look into restoring their equal rights on Facebook.
We'll see.
There is a (we will say monopoly here) because there is no real competition for the product they make. Its not like they are stopping anyone, it just doesnt exist. They took over MySpace at the time there was nothing like that. And some would argue Twitter, Snapcaht, Instagram, Whatsapp, And MANY other companies are looked at as "competition" to FB. I personally wouldnt, but I would say those companies could take business from FB but not a direct competitor.
And I watched both days of questioning and I dont recall them ever saying FB discriminated specifically against "conservatives". They more kept referencing a fair and balanced website.
so what you're saying is..... if they decided to kick off all black people- that would be okay??
They wouldnt. That would never happen, so using that as an overly dramatic example wouldnt really apply. And we arent discussing whats OK but rather what is legal for them to do with their private company.