Content hosting platforms I want them to merely do what's legal.
It's not up to them to make moral decisions.
They could still make those (moral decisions) in other areas, e.g. paying their employees a good salary and not exploiting them, paying taxes, and so on.
>This is again the same old debate of whether is some sort of fundamental right to be served by Cloudflare or have your content hosted by Twitter.
I think that's mostly a debate in US culture, where the concepts about censorship begin and end with what some founding Santas said 3 centuries ago and its all about what the state can and cannot do.
In 2020, platforms are more important than the state for censoring. They even have larger revenue than entire countries GDPs, and they are also operated by people promoting their own culture and national interests, while catering to an international audience of billions. It's the ultimate soft power space and has vastly eclipsed the "public square".
So, in 2020, as opposed to 1920 where the public square might have been enough, having access to something like Google or YouTube should be enforced as a legal right unless explicitly cut off by court order (as opposed by corporate whim).
Even economically, if you think about it, think how Google search ranking for example (or lack thereof) could sink companies globally at the whim of Google operators.