[radisb]

>Moreover, as the self-appointed facilitators of the new self-government of the online global population,32 currently there is little that would prevent the leading social media platforms from using and canalizing this civic power for the goals they see fit – much like a government with the difference that governments are subject to democratic oversight..

2 things on the above: First point, self-appointed does not matter. It is just a declaration. What matters is that people/users themselves turned this declaration into a fact. So, second point, platforms are subject to democratic oversight: Like you control your vote, you control your keyboard or mouse that clicks the sign-up button or accepts the TOS, you control the mouth and the fingers that propagate the information, and the brain that consumes it.

I really dislike it when people , by their own actions, become dependent on a service someone else offers in such a degree that they feel they are now entitled to the service and that it is now a public good. They strive to establish and cement this dependence on their own terms, assigning now the responsibility of maintaining it to the offerer (again on their own terms). That's the relationship between a spoiled child and its parents, not between a man and the society.

Sorry for my bad English. Not my mother tongue.