Yes, they did. The big tech, for obscure or shortsighted judgements, dig their own hole, so big of a hole there is no easy way to get out of. The big tech's reputation and trust are shuttered.
'You fool me once shame on you, you fool me twice shame on me' - you fool me once and I let you know I'm aware of it. If you ever think to fool me again, you don't give me options but to use alternatives. And if there were not many options last year, there are options now and there are going to be plenty in the future.
Some of the big tech more visible than others are: Facebook, Twitter, LinkedIn, Google, ATT, Comcast, and to some extend Apple and Amazon. And one that I feel upset more is Mozilla Foundation - there is no reason to get into politics, I respect you for your technology, but please don't force my hand.
The big tech focus should be about great technical solutions or services and not filtering or censorship people' opinions.
Rationality
1. Instead of being political neutral, the big tech took sides, actually one side. The reason for two parties is that one balances the other. In their great wisdom, the big tech took only one side so there is no balance in what they do. The end result is they upset half of their users or customers. The other half will get upset at some point, that's what happen when there is no objective balance.
2. By censorship ahead of a court judgement, the big tech encourages people not to respect the law. What better example of big tech aggressive censorship than the case in Kenosha, Wisconsin. The case was about a human right as is in any civilized country - you do what you have to do to defend yourself when you're attacked. People opinionated about this fact in a distorted way because of big tech censorship. The result is that the big tech incentivized their users to think it's OK to not respect the law because: 1) people have strong feelings about what they said or read and 2) the judgement in the case was against what big tech allowed people to talk about.
3. Evidence is piling that there was something wrong with 2020 election. And even more with the Jan 6th 2021 event. We've seen one party created a false story about so called 'Russia collusion'. This might sound wild, but it happened once so it can happen again - what if one party, either one, created a diversion on Jan 6th similar to 'Russia collusion'? Regardless, if the big tech is wrong about 2020 election or Jan 6th event and they censored legitimate people' opinions, their reputation will be gone forever.
4. And the biggest blunder of all is the narrative of the covid pandemic and the covid vaccines. The damage caused by big tech censorship about covid vaccines can be catastrophic. There are early signs from high vaccinated countries regarding hospitalization and deaths that there is something fundamentally wrong with the new experimental vaccines. Top medical experts, I'm talking about experts not government officials, pray themselves that their predictions be wrong. We should all pray that some top experts predictions be wrong. Otherwise, it is not only big tech but all of us will suffer. No big tech’s censorship for money or any other interest can justify such potential suffering.
Never ever, people's opinions equal misinformation. We get stronger if we hear each other even if sometime we don't like others opinions or our opinions are wrong. No fact check, no big tech can replace my thinking and judgement. I am capable of fact checking myself as many of us do. By telling me something is true or false, big tech implies I'm stupid as I can not think for myself, or understand or check a fact. Big tech better change course otherwise there are or will be plenty of alternatives. Are they going to change course?
Update 11/21/2021
What a better example than this about big tech digging their deep hole. What is misleading about as these are straight forward facts: 1) FDA slow process of releasing documents used for the approval of COMIRNATY vaccine might take 55 years and 2) explosive number of adverse reactions in one category before end of Feb 2021 described by Pfizer in the internal documents to FDA. Twitter does a great de-service to the country and the world
Update 12/11/2021
The latest revelation from Facebook that ‘fact check’ is opinion is mind-blowing. It’s just business as usually for big tech: use whatever mean, trick, fraud to pretend ‘fact check’ objectivity for censorship, when the opposite is true: censor based on opinion and business generated revenue. They are done being trustworthy.
Update 12/28/2021
Regarding point 4 above, if confirmed, is catastrophic, though these are preliminary finding. See details here
If the autopsy findings are confirmed by other pathologists with additional samples, and if they are combined with the findings of Dr. Hoffe (>60% inoculant recipients have elevated D-dimer tests and evidence of clotting) and Dr. Cole (increase in cancers after inoculation, including twenty-fold increase in uterine cancer), we are seeing a disaster of unimaginable proportions. The conclusion (if supported by further data) is that essentially EVERY inoculant recipient suffers damage, with more damage after each shot. Given the seriousness of the types of damage (autoimmune diseases, cancer, re-emergent dormant infections, clotting/strokes, cardiac damage, etc.), these effects will translate into lifespan reduction, which should be counted as deaths from the inoculations. So, in the USA, where ~200M people have been fully inoculated, the number of deaths will not be the 10,000 or so reported in VAERS, or the 150,000+ scaled-up deaths from VAERS, but could be closer to tens of millions when the inoculation effects play out!
Update 01/02/2022
The differences in censorship methods used in US today vs. China. Many of you have wondered about the differences. Here's your answer. January 2nd, 2022