People seem to think social media is akin to private communications where it's more akin to the public square. Making your IG/FB/whatever profile private doesn't change that.
In NYC for example, there's been a large uptick in teen shootings, many adjacent to schools, and a lot of it involves the idiots posting on social media before & after. One tool could be simply scraping social media for these postings. Another alternate, pre-internet tool was stop&frisk.
While you have a constitutional right to not be searched without consent/probably cause, you do not have a constitutional right to spouting off in the public square without consequence. What you say publicly can & will be used against you in the court of law.
Putting out an IG post of yourself with illegal guns or inciting a shooting is no more private than printing out posters of the same and putting them up around the neighborhood.
If someone tells you something in private in a public square in a way that nobody else in the public square can hear it, like lowering the volume of their voice so nobody else can hear, then it is possible to discuss in private in a public setting. There is no obligation to immediately share that private information with the entire public square just because the public square was used. This isn't some FOSS with a licensing agreement that says it must be made public.
You can use the features of a social platform to share with a chosen group of people while not allowing the entirety of the platform access. That's what private means. Not respecting that for sake of "it's a public platform" is just that person being a dick. Whether that's you holding this opinion or a scrapper justifying their manner if not respecting the poster's intent, it's all people with utter lack of respect. It's an AB conversation, and you're trying to be C. We've already indicated you're not the intended audience by setting to private. You doing everything you can to get around that is, again, you being a dick
Just like posting things on your social media profile and 1000s of people see it instead of 100s of people you intended.
Another offline analogy would be - talking on your cellphone, you have the right to be free of warrantless wiretap.
However, if you sit down in a bar that you thought "was cool" and take a phone call, but the bar happens to have accidentally let a cop or "narc" in .. and they overheard your end of the phone call because you talk too loud, then what they testify hearing is totally admissible in court, and you are an idiot.
Then you come back with: "but you speak in a way that more people hear you than intended.."
You just changed what I specifically said so it would fit your narrative. Yes, you can be in a bar and think you're talking quietly, but the 3 pints and 2 shots you've consumed means that you're still yelling, just means you're a drunken fool. If you're in a restaurant or some other public setting while sober, you can actually talk to someone without the rest of the public hearing.