Tech giants collaborate with the EU and UN to censor speech globally

I'm unsure about the point that's being made here. Yes, EU regulation can affect American consumers, but it's been the other way around for decades. Lack of regulation, or regulation that Europeans disagree with, has affected us on a US-centric internet. letting hate run rampart but censoring a mother breastfeeding her baby has never made a lot of sense to me, but I had to live with it.

The solution is straight-forward. Most of the tech giants are American, so if Americans disapprove of EU regulation creeping in, they can tell their companies, through legislation or however else to respect American law, and when those companies operate in Europe or somewhere else they provide services in accordance with local law. It's more overhead for tech companies, but that's how every other industry works. Then everyone's sovereignty is respected and we don't need to stumble over each others toes.

This is such a hairy problem. On the one hand, the simplistic libertarian argument—“Private companies don’t have to host content they don’t like, period!”—fails to convince because of the special legal status enjoyed by online platforms due to the CDA. On the other hand, it’s definitely not a straightforward first-amendment issue, because the first amendment is explicitly narrow: it bars congress from passing laws that restrict free speech. Perhaps the best argument I’ve come across is that private censorship is an issue of civil rights, rather than constitutionally-guaranteed civil liberties. The legal justification for, say, not allowing businesses of public accommodation to discriminate based on race doesn’t come from the constitution. Nevertheless, only a few on the far right want the CRA to be repealed.