We know that Google, Facebook, Twitter, etc. actively police what is said on their networks. We know that they do so with a clear political bias. Nevermind if it is legal or not. Nevermind if it is moral or not. First, and foremost, it's fucking retarded business policy and on that point alone it should end, permanently.
The reason is simple: so long as there is no interference in the operations of the users, the providers can take the position that they merely provide access to the medium and therefore have no liability for anything that goes on therein. This form of neutrality is what we demanded out of radio, television, and film distribution. It's why, for a long time, we had a clear demarcation between those who make the stuff that goes out and those who run and maintain the means to do so.
This is why the known trend of these entities to engage in politically-motivated and biased censorship is not just wrong, but stupid and bad for business. Maintaining a strict neutrality policy, insisting only on removing that which is disruptive to the physical operation of the network, in the way that one removes bandits from roads and pirates from sea lanes because they clog up the network and impede its operation. That is all Google (et. al.) should bother with- and in sensible management, would.
Irrational management policy is the sign that fools and entryists have seized power and converged the organization to the entryists' ends. Fortunately, even Google is disposable, expendable, and fungible. The solution is to fung it, so you can expend it, and then dispose of it in favor of a superior alternative.