Your statement is true. Its also true that the tech market is too consolidated to be considered a free market.
That's the issue with Parler hosting. With hosting, you're digitally renting.
But this is being painted as "monopolies against free speech", and it's not. There's hundreds, maybe thousands of hosting companies. At least dozens of ways to take payments. Thousands of law firms.
I think everyone is in agreement that big tech has too much influence. But big tech isn't what's keeping Parler off the web. It's not "leftists" either. It's legal liability for things like the capital riots.
Legal liability, aka the threat of government is what's keeping Parker offline. Not big tech. All the US companies are just falling in line, protecting themselves from lawsuits and expensive court cases
Without state intervention, free market don't remain free on its own?
So, what is free about free markets?
In that framing, the market is free from economic privilege, and individual actors are free to compete on equal footing.
What confuses me is the overloading of "free market" to mean something opposed to government intervention.
Free market socialism isn't a contradiction, despite what many would have you believe (think: worker owned co-operatives and nonprofits that compete in the broader market).
Similarly, market economies need not be wholly unregulated to be good. And indeed, I think you'd be hard pressed to find mainstream economists who claim that worker safety regulations are bad (like, they might be able to point to particular regulations that are dumb, but there are many that are not).