Well, when you put it that way I suppose this does have a lot of disadvantages. Maybe they should only apply this law to big corporations only? Like youtube, reddit, twitter, etc. But even that is unfair. I think the law should be applied to people equally.

If this law ever becomes federal law, maybe the government should come out with their own social media alternatives. Social media that is owned by the government is admittedly a shit idea, but if this law becomes federal, then the government should just make their own equivalent of youtube, reddit, etc. They should call it FedTube. Feddit. GlowNitter. Etc.

Since these platforms would be owned by the government, they would have no choice but to allow free speech because the law would say so. So people can own their own private companies and censor as much as they want (Youtube) but also have a government alternative if they want a platform for free speech (Fedtube).

Just an idea though, it probably has a lot of flaws so take it with a grain of salt. Newsflash though, everything is controlled by (((them))) anyway, and youtube is more than just a "private company". It is the biggest video sharing website in the world, and if you are of this size, you have a responsibility to enforce free speech because of the influence this giant platform has.