As shit as twitter nowadays is, I’d rather have the (as little as it might be) competition that Twitter provides for the corporatised internet, than have Google and Facebook being the only ones to be operating social media platforms.

You're implying X/Google/Facebook are the only companies with a social media presence - when that's clearly not the case. Have you forgotten that Lemmy and Mastodon exist? We already have wonderful alternatives to "corporatised" social networks. We don't need X.

Also - last I checked Google has shut down every social network they've ever tried to create, unless you classify gmail and youtube as social networks (I wouldn't).

Facebook and Instagram are now the only large social networks operated by a public company. And even that company has launched Threads which will soon be on the fediverse taking away a lot of their ability control things. If Threads does anything users don't like, it'll be really easy for users to jump ship to another instance.

DIGI, the network this article is about, is not a "social network" focused group. It's a general internet focused group and, among other things, it includes a commitment to have some kind of public policy document which is actually followed. X has a policy document - but they're not following their own policies which is why they were kicked out.

I don't understand what you're actually trying to say.

As a society it's ok for us to have expectations of companies like Twitter and its ok to notice when they fail to meet those expectations.

Digital megacorps do not get a free pass because we don't want them to fall out of the oligopoly.

I couldn't care less what platform everyone's grandma is using this week, provided that they apply a bare minimum of effort to reduce misinformation.