Here is our perspective.
We believe that the owner of a web site or resource has the right to determine what content is posted on it. If you start a web forum for stamp collecting and somebody comes in and posts about model trains, you have a right to take down the off-topic content.
However, if you promote yourself as a general social media site with the express purpose of helping people come together and communicate and share, and those people invest themselves in your resource, and upload photos and videos and other content, and provide profile data which you then mine and make money off of, then you do not have a right to betray these people and tell them what opinions they can and cannot express (so long as that expression is within legal limits).
For example, if you are Facebook and promote yourself with language like “Connect with friends, family and other people you know. Share photos and videos, send …” etc., and you lure people to invest their time, resources, data, and money based on that pretense, you have no right to then “fact check” your users’ posts with left-wing information manipulators, ban content based on political ideas, and de-platform users because of their political beliefs.
If you, being “Facebook,” promoted yourself as “a left-wing social media site” then you have every right to edit users’ content based on political ideas because that would be in line with the contract of expectations you purposefully promoted.
But, when you promote yourself with neutral language in order to get people to invest themselves for your profit, then it doesn’t matter what your vague “community standards” and “acceptable usage” policies are — you have already created a contract of expectations by your own carefully-crafted, purposeful language, and you have no right to manipulate the legal content of those you have used for your profit.
This is especially true if your resource is so large that it has become a virtual monopoly in its field.
When a resource becomes this abusive and dishonest, it’s time for people to move on and let it die.
As much as the Big Tech monopoly would like you to think otherwise, there are options.