Seems potentially overbroad: Do we truly want tech companies to be unable to ban expression based upon viewpoint no matter the viewpoint is? How about advocates of chattel slavery or using rape as a weapon of war? Right now the problem seems to be people with one popular viewpoint banning another popular viewpoint. It is a problem if one third of the population has a common view, and they want to use tech platforms to silence the opposing third and keep them from making arguments that might appeal to an undecided/disinterested third. I'm not convinced that it's a problem when a company doesn't want its platform used to convey messaging for a viewpoint that is universally reviled.