Yes.
But unlike government, they are not using force. That discussion made that very clear.

We can quit worrying about Big Tech! Elizabeth Warren is taking them on. Looney left!

I liked how they used used the term, “censor by force” for government censoring. This is not how a private business ever censors something.

Thanks, Solver. 👍

Big Tech is like California.

Decades ago, it was that California is a bellwether State and trends developed here would be accepted by the greater United States, on a 2 decade lag.

It was true for a while but California shifted so much to the left that the country will never join up.

It is one thing to be technologically advanced and quite another to pile political correctness on top of it.

And there is the problem with Big Tech. They usurped their reputation and leading status in tech to add political goals.

It is too late to remedy that now. It is like the deep state, remedy comes from complete replacement involving the deletion of the present state.

It'll be a huge effort and I don't see anyone being able to take it on.

Hopefully they will set him straight around the concept of censorship, explain that only the government can censor and that far from stopping, we should all be supporting the rights of tech companies against the Marxist assault from conservatives.

There is a way to curtail the power of Big Tech. Note: I do not normally suggest of promote what I am about to suggest as a solution but Big Tech is out of control.
Consider the case of communications companies. They are regulated as to speech content (Radio/Television) customer relations (telephone companies) Rates (telephone and utilities) . If Big Tech (Google, Twitter, Instagram, etc) is classified as a public utility and the processes in place for the control and monitoring of such were place on Big Tech the hidden “censorship” of ideas and news would be minimized (but not eliminated). Rules for access and use would be codified and monitored. Rules for content would be also.
All policies procedures and internal guidance would be available or public review and comment.There would be established methods of protesting/challenging these itmes and obtaining a hearing on them.
This is some restraint on free trade of ideas but history has shown Big Tech does not support the free exchange of ideas and though but only of what “they” approve of. There are many things that would have to be worked out but this approach could work to open the flow of thoughts and ideas without the throttling by Big Tech.
Just my off the cuff thoughts. I know there are a lot of holes and problems in this idea but it is an approach that might work.