[pumaontheprowl]

If Facebook is responsible for the content users see on their site, how is Apple not responsible for the content users see on Safari? I really don't see how you can argue for banning the Instagram app while the Safari app still allows users to visit the Instagram website and view the exact same content.

Ultimately, this is the textbook definition of virtue signalling. Apple was never going to ban Facebook; they just want to let people know they oppose slavery (their own factories excluded of course).

[DrBenCarson]

Because Facebook amplifies or suppresses all content based on revenue implications. You're not seeing user content as submitted by users. A post with 10 likes from a day ago will be presented ahead of a post with 15 likes from 20m ago if Facebook thinks it has a better chance of getting you to engage (i.e. infuriates you because it's ludicrous misinformation)

Apple doesn't make revenue based on some StumbleUpon-like Safari experience where they dictate the content in your Safari window.