It is not feasible for communications companies to quickly delete all offensive postings. AI of today's sort can't come close to recognizing them.

Let's not assume that companies should be required to delete all offensive postings. A small site can decide arbitrarily what to let people publish, without really censoring people -- they can communicate elsewhere. Not so for a giant site.

When a private company grows to the point of dominating a large fraction of people's communication, censorship by that company is almost equivalent to censorship by the state. It is ludicrous for giants such as Facebook and Google to claim the right, as "private" entities, to impose rules about what people can say, all the while profiting from being perceived as "indispensable" by many people.

We did not allow telephone companies to censor conversations, and that's effectively what Facebook is doing.

By the way, please don't use the term "content" to refer to publications or works. It disparages them all.

The International Criminal Court is prosecuting an Islamist for enslaving women.

The death penalty is used less, world-wide, but China is keeping the practice going.

The forced, scripted "confessions" of prisoners of China.

Wealth Inequality Is Soaring -– Here Are the 10 Reasons Why It's Happening.

The ultimate reason, the reason that these policies exist, is plutocracy.