Let’s look at the censorship issue from a more macro perspective. What are the available options, and how would they work?
There are essentially three options as to the social media companies: no censorship; censorship by the companies themselves; and censorship by the government. The first option is the one the companies prefer, as it makes them the most money and creates the least amount of inconvenience. However, it has led to ferocious criticism about the spread of clear misinformation from large number of consumers and from their own employees, while widespread lies on social media have destabilized entire political systems, the US not excepted, which is a potential danger to the very existence of the companies. The second option is consistent with First Amendment jurisprudence and avoids potentially dangerous government involvement, but it exposes the companies to constant criticism about unequal treatment from both the right and left, and costs lots of money to boot. The companies would thus prefer the third to the second option, as long as it is done with a light touch. That, unfortunately, cannot be guaranteed. Once government censorship starts, there is no guarantee it won’t be used by partisans of one side to stifle the opposition. Government involvement, therefore, can only work if the two political parties are trustworthy, and behave in good faith.
Does that sound like America in 2022 to you?