You tell me when I can open a segregated lunch counter, or refuse to bake a gay wedding cake, and I'll consider your argument to have merit. Otherwise, it's only a matter of time until Facebook and company are brought to heel under that "public accommodation" approach.

The author of the article is asking whether or not it is good that one of the world's main channels of information is controlled by a large company that can and does do whatever it wants with the information. Once a company becomes large enough and controls enough of our lives, the fact that it technically can do whatever it wants becomes "immaterial" as you say. That makes this story more significant than just "water is wet." Like it or not, we don't live in a libertarian society.

What's your point here? We shouldn't bother to discuss the activities of large, powerful companies unless we own shares in them?