[Andrew_nenakhov]

YouTube is a de-facto monopoly (a fact further complicated that it seems to be closely aligned with the current ruling party).

Monopolies have a more or less successful history of being regulated. In other words, governments limiting their exploitation of their market position.

[duhast]

I will only point out that it took Twitter years to ban Trump despite him violating their ToS almost on a daily basis. Your point about "alignment" applies to power in general. Be it political power, money or influence and following.

How is YouTube exploiting their market position? Last time I checked it cost literally 0$ to use their video platform. What do you think government should do?

[Andrew_nenakhov]

Twitter banning and censoring Trump was an extremely outrageous action. Only very short-sighted and brainwashed people cheer for it because they are unable to imagine whom this playform with enormous reach would ban next. What if it'll be your favourite candidate?

Of course, you'll say that your candidate will never break ToSs, but we've seen just today that these terms are rather random and can change on a whim.

Think just one step further into the future.

[goatlover]

It was only because Trump worked really hard to earn that banning with his false claims about an election being stolen. It's not something Twitter wanted to have to do. But Trump was acting in a very dangerous manner concerning the democratic outcome of an election which he refused to accept.

[dragonwriter]

> I will only point out that it took Twitter years to ban Trump despite him violating their ToS almost on a daily basis.

They actually rewrote their ToS specifically to excuse not sanctioning his violations while continuing to sanction others without his institutional position for the same violations.