[Nasrudith]

I personally see it as "plausible deniability" as the cynical actual distinction for what gets people to share blame. Not actual affiliations or whose servers it is run on. Any number of objectionable sites are run on AWS and you basically need to be an international scandal or violating preexisting terms to get booted. Like some malware to governments merchants. Amazon's policies did not care if it was legal just if you were doing so unauthorized. A wise move when international law is really like the Pirate code.

The interlinking between the pages themselves and common branding are what creates the associations. Distributed twitter alternatives like Mastodon can even share the same branding but it is on a per network basis and complex enough to allow for some "innocent" questionable connections.