zlacker

>>danso+(OP)
The neutral companies, such as utilities, online hosting or financial providers serve nearly everyone with little objections - they defer to the law rather than any internal policies. The more selective companies such as newspapers and TV channels are expected to restrict who can get published.

By representing itself both as an open platform and as a company with progressive values, Twitter has put itself into an awkward in-between spot and is bound to create such controversies.

>>lykahb+T21
Twitter has never been a "Utility" in the way that you may be imagining it to be.

>>riffic+Sc1
Yes, of course - but - it is becoming so.

Twitter and Facebook are starting to approach the threshold of 'public good' wherein at least, there would need to be rules or regulations.

If TW and FB did not actually regulate their content - we would see this exposed much more quickly. Foreign/Russian interference in elections would immediately force Congress to act, there's just too much power.

Aside from the ambiguities of 'how and what to police' we do have the added complexity of the nature of 'large, ostensibly public platforms' managed by private companies.