[aflag]

None of that is technically censorship. They are all private companies and they have the prerogative to give the users a TOS, which they can accept or not. That said, I do think that having more options is always good, a decentralized Internet is a richer Internet.

[mreome]

Just a nit-pick, but the suppression of speech by a private institution is still censorship, it's just not government censorship. I think maybe you were conflating it with the First Amendment, which applies only to the government and it's agents and not private companies.

In agreement with everything after your first sentence though.

[aflag]

Yes, it was a poor attempt of trying to explain the common misconception that the First Amendment applies to private business. You are correct, though, the word censorship is broader than that.

[chasd00]

are TOS required by law that if they are enforced then they are enforced equally? i doubt it but it seems like a contract violation to selectively enforce the TOS.

[aflag]

If you break the TOS, then the service provider can take any actions they are entitled to in the TOS at their discretion. You can challenge the validity of the TOS, but you can't force the service provider to be good or fast at enforcing their TOS.