Something something free market.
Yeah most of these services are doing that to avoid being associated with Parler and these Trump movements. But it has an anti-democratic feel to it.
As I mentioned above, what they are likely asking themselves is pragmatic instead of moral, i.e. "which option exposes us as a company to the most legal problems? What hurts profits?"
That explains why service providers changed their thinking so suddenly and dramatically after, you know, a whole lot of serious crimes against the state happened on the 6th, and the evidence trail runs through those service providers.
Adendum: why _must_ they ask themselves that? Do you think Facebook ever has acted in that way? Do you think that Fox News does?
It would be nice, but recognise that none of these are entities dedicated to maximising democracy. They have been behaving otherwise for decades. They won't spontaneously change of their own accord.
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/11/06/technology/myanmar-facebo...
Amazon, Apple, etc don't work democratically though so it doesn't matter.
Being complacent with these things gets people killed. You can have free speech all you want but are also responsible for what you say.
Free speech doesn't mean you get a free pass without consequences.
switch to arabic language and you will see things that could be easily identified as violent propaganda,yet they stay up because FB censorship system is not interested in enforcing rules in that sector
from what i hear its pretty much the same for India