If you take a look at https://www.allsides.com/blog/capitol-hill-breach-riot-cover..., you'll see a deep analysis of a double standard in how media covered this riot versus other such events (including past riots at the capitol!).

A significant number of riots took place in 2020, and this is true even in DC. For example just take a look at the photos and videos in https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/may/31/fires-light-..., which shows damage on a far greater scale than this recent capitol riot. Lots of people and organizations on Twitter or Facebook had organized these events, which included looting, property damage, vandalism, assaults, arson, and more. Many politicians, such as AOC, condoned and even encouraged these events (see https://twitter.com/ConceptualJames/status/13480304421596897...). This extends to news media as well, who often mislabeled violent riots as "peaceful protests" and excused them or covered them in a sympathetic way (see https://dailycaller.com/2021/01/07/media-downplays-blm-antic... or https://nypost.com/2021/01/08/rage-at-capitol-assault-makes-...). All these actors were inciting violence, certainly to the standard Twitter uses to judge them (https://blog.twitter.com/en_us/topics/company/2020/suspensio...).

These other past events included much more significant economic damage in the billions and many more deaths than the capitol riot. So why are all those people and organizations allowed to continue using their social media accounts? Why weren't those same participants, organizes, enablers, and sympathizers criticized just as heavily by politicians, news media, social media, and others? This is a clear double standard, where criminality and violence is permitted if those who are in control of these platforms (news outlets, tech companies) agree with your cause and share your ideology.