You don't think FaceBook, Twitter(Microblogging) and Google(Search) are monopolies because there are tiny namesake competitors.
Not exactly. Facebook faces (no pun intended)
stiff competition in the social media space:
Facebook: 2.7 billion users
YouTube: 2.3 billion users
WhatsApp: 2.0 billion users
Messenger: 1.3 billion users
Tumblr: 642 Million users
... and Twitter is nowhere near a monopoly; it is among the smallest
social communication platforms:
Twitter : 353 million users
QQ: 617 million users
Instagram: 1 billion users
Snapchat: 498 million users
TikTok: 699 million users
WeChat: 1.2 billion usershttps://sproutsocial.com/insights/social-media-statistics/
As far as search engines go, Google is by far the biggers, for one reason: it is simply the best. Nobody stopped other engines from achieving the results Google has... but those other companies simply haven done it, Having said that, even search engine usage is a bit more nuanced, with wide variations between different parts of the world. See:https://99firms.com/blog/search-engine- ... by%2053%25
Most are moving their HQs to Texas because top management can avoid taxes, so Texas Governor and legislators have a say.
State governments have no say over the rights of platforms, regardless of where those companies have their headquarters; social media companies are controlled by Section 230 of the Commercial Decency Act. Abbott's publicity stunt is just that - a publicity stunt, designed to take the attention away from his and his cohorts' lack of preparedness for the winter weather disaster in Texas.
Facebook completely in bed with RW nationalist government in India. Twitter rarely deletes offensives posts by RW in India, never bans any offending verified accounts close to government. Banned Trump in US.
The RW nationalist government in India is a repulsive, demagogic, pandering party... but to blame its rise solely on social media would be to overlook the basic divides in society that made it possible for it to rear its ugly head and prey on the bigoted, biased, and ill-informed population that is its base of support. Just like Trump... and, just like Trump, there will hopefully be a reckoning as people realize the politics of fear is not the proper vehicle in a democratic world.
I sympathize with your goals, but allowing a state - and then, ultimately allowing each
state - to set its own rules for worldwide social media companies would be an unenforceable, drastic, and counterproductive move. It is not the solution to any problems social media has.