[frostiness]

You can have both. People can intentionally choose platforms that make them feel less free in exchange for convenience. It just means that the convenience (and network effects) that they get out of using a more convenient platform are more valuable to them than the ability to communicate freely. When most people are using these platforms non-anonymously (i.e. to talk with their friends) they probably also get less out of privacy than people talking to others they've never met in person.

It's worthwhile to consider a balance between convenience, plausible deniability (people don't really want to be that guy in the coffee shop on Tor), and privacy. Privacy platforms nowadays consider privacy above all else because most people heavily into privacy are purists that don't want to sacrifice any privacy in exchange for having more people to talk with. It's one of the reasons I still respect Telegram with all of its shortcomings, because even though it's relatively insecure in comparison to its competitors, it takes convenience into account and as such has more users than most all privacy-centric messengers while still providing end-to-end encryption for the people that desire it (at least in theory, the cryptography's a bit shaky).