[alignItems]

This is political/legal distinction.

Perhaps Facebook now is a publisher and needs to increase censorship even more.

Or the law can be changed to differentiate based on the scale of contributions and the corresponding complexity of moderation.

[fer]

The distinction needs to be there, from the moment FB (or Twitter) has a conflict of interest: their revenue depends on the content being engaging, regardless its factuality.

In my head, if they do any filtering or ordering of content, they have to be accountable such content, since they are exerting a de facto editorial line.

I don't really understand how a newspaper publishing an incendiary op-ed can accountable for it, whereas the same thing as a viral FB post won't hold FB accountable. The only difference is that an editor picks the former, and an algorithm picks the latter.

Is that it? Does delegating responsibilities to a computer make us any less responsible of the results?