I found a good article on this apology written by Jeffrey A. Tucker, on the Richardson Post (CLICK HERE)

That's one reason I think it's important to keep blogs and websites like mine alive. I can write without fear of being de-platformed. I can also starve because of company's like Facebook that promise to be fair places to set up your profile and post your opinions. Who wants to spend all that time to get a thousand followers gathered up, only to say the wrong thing about a hot-button political issue, and then you are told you've been put in the penalty box.

Mark's apology proves it's possible.

I've worked in IT, and though it's not been at the level of a Facebook CEO, I have noticed a pattern. If the IT guys have the power to do something, someone inside of IT is going to push that button and use that power. A company like Facebook has the power to make superstars of people, with the filters and algorithms at their disposal.

It's his company though. So should he be allowed to curate what gets seen, or not seen? Maybe he should be able to do that when he wants. I'm not familiar with the fine print in the Facebook terms of use. But it probably says they don't do that, and it's a fair place to post, and everything gets treated fairly.

The public should be aware if censoring is going on, and then they should get off that platform if they don't agree.

‍