Yeah, for sure. Call it freedom of information, add a little bit of common sense to it, and your argument renders itself completely invalid.

Google demonstrates that it doesn't follow a revenue driven agenda with these actions. It involves itself in selecting political views that it deems acceptable to influence the opinions of a world wide audience. It is large enough to take on a quasi governmental role. If it was just acting as a neutral platform, I would buy your argument, but it obviously doesn't.

The internet has driven the pareto distribution of attention to such extremes that we now are in this mess. There is no getting out of this by engaging in the hairsplitting of an old legal text.