I get what you're saying. And yet Facebook HQ's physical address is 1 Hacker Way. Not 1 Big Business Way, nor 1 Status Quo Way, nor 1 Software Engineer Way. Hacker Way. Google used to speak about allowing the whole world to access information with ease, including projects like making libraries accessible.
Clearly Facebook and Google at least identify themselves with hacker culture. I'm not sure if Twitter ever professed any sort of noble goals, though it's a dwarf compared to the other two.
> With the President and many politicians supporting the killing in in Kenosha, clearly a portion of those in power support it.
I'm not sure I'd say anyone supports the killing. I personally think it was a big mistake for that kid to go there, regardless of whether he has the right to. It was a bad decision, and led to a tragic situation where there were no winners. That said, he's not a murderer; if anything, the mob was coming after him (guns firing in multiple cases) to kill him.
I also question the de facto power that the president has when the press really is able to control when and how he says what he says. And the press's lies seem to be getting more absurd and brazen. (The personality of the current president does him no favors. It's a negative, in fact.) He holds de jure power, but given his inability to pull 2000 troops from Syria or drop charges against his former National Security Adviser, his legal authority seems like the Queen's royal prerogatives++. The press and entertainment industries, the universities and the bureaucracy seem to hold fragments of power both legally and in the culture, which makes the de jure power a bit weak.
> There are alternative news sites, forums and even social media. Nobody is locked to these sites, except for an entitlement to an audience.
Twitter and Facebook have strong network effects, which effectively does lock people in. YouTube's are much weaker, which is why I suspect decentralized video will be the first decentralized service if they can get some legal kinks worked out. (There's also a legal argument about monopoly common carriers, even at common law, and how they shouldn't terminate service unless the law is violated.) However, even if we accepted that these were competitive, this kind of competition can only exist when we at least have some level of order and security. The reason.com article seems to indicate how we do not have that kind of basic stability.