Social media is still media. Why split hairs about one but not the other..... and it’s hardly censorship if the platform asked the post to provide evidence and the post refused to do so. But if you would like to see these stories published on social media, you could always start your own platform. You could call it Dawg’s Breakfast... USA! USA!
Why did the platforms ask one of the most well known and established papers in America to provide it's evidence but failed to do so for multiple other stories broken by NYTIMES, CNN, MSNBC throughout the last 4 years?
I know you're only defending this position because social media is an advantage to democrat / left leaning voters. Particularly Twitter which is probably the hardest left leaning of all the platforms.
At the end of a day as a society (including all types of voters) we have created an issue whereby the flow of information is now largely tied to 3-4 companies. Twitter, Facebook, google and maybe one other. If these companies don't do the right thing or allow information to flow, they can influence the outcome of an election. This is not a good outcome for any democracy.
Regardless of whether anyone is right or left leaning, if we believe in democracy, we should not be thrilled with the idea of 3-4 largely unregulated companies with the ability to influence political outcomes.
