There are objective truths. It doesn't matter if you think the earth is flat. It's not. And I really wish this was a contrived example
From the spectrum of Math -> Physics -> Chemistry -> Biology -> Psychology, where do you draw the line? This isn't an easy question.
That is really really good. Yet, take that 0.1% to scale. In America alone that would mean that you have 330,000 people that think the Earth is flat. On Facebook scale (2.5 billion monthly average users) that'd be all the way up to 2.5 million people. And thanks to the internet people with 'eccentric' views are more capable than ever of joining up with other people with such views. And people with these views tend to be very strongly inclined to do just that, alongside also trying to evangelize their views so much as they can - because they think they know something other people do not.
This effect creates a deeply misleading image of the relative popularity of various views and values. Can you imagine a Facebook group with millions of people who genuinely think the Earth is flat, and many people popping their head up in various locations to advocate for such a view? You could have that, yet it be the case that 99.9% of people do not feel that way.
Scale is a hell of a thing. And given the increasing size of various platforms, you're always going to see what you perceive to be large numbers of people with rather peculiar views and values. It in no way suggests there are actually large numbers of people with these views and values. The social media paradox stands head and shoulders above that relatively petty birthday paradox.
Why do we want a world where platforms protect videos promoting and glorifying beheadings, exactly?
To play devil's advocate, "objectively" these beheadings are still happening somewhere in the world. It's an undeniable truth even though you don't want to see the evidence for it. For a lot of people this is their flat earth. No evidence means it's not happening.
Why not allow the content to be seen, let the world be horrified that there are people driven to become like this, and try to understand what led them to do those things?
At the time, conservative media outlets seemed predominantly critical that American platforms weren't censoring enough content. Even if that content wasn't actually illegal to publish under US law.
Here's a 2014 article from the conservative site WorldNetDaily, for example:
"ISIS-branded merchandise sold on Amazon, Facebook"
https://www.wnd.com/2014/09/isis-branded-merchandise-sold-on...
Quotes from the article:
Dave Gaubatz, author of “Muslim Mafia: Inside the Secret Underworld That’s Conspiring to Islamize America,” contends Facebook and other social media sites have a responsibility to shut down the forums used to market radical Islam and mobilize Islamic youth.
“I am a defender of the U.S. Constitution but the Constitution was not designed for enemies of America,” said Gaubatz, a former U.S. Air Force investigator.
“We must stop jihad online because these groups target our children through social media,” he told Fox News.
...
“ISIS is more than likely not producing shirts but indirectly they are benefiting from it,” Scotty Neil, a former Green Beret who founded Operator, a clothing company geared toward special ops soldiers, told Fox News. “I don’t think that T-shirt company X is sending the Islamic State funds, but people wearing these shirts are making an outward statement and that often starts a dialogue and debate that furthers their message.”