We are seeing the slippery slope argument played out in real time. That's the argument that says, even if the original intention is good, the rule isn't worth it because the danger of it being expanded into other undesirable uses outweighs any benefit of having the rule.

The ORIGINAL reason for banning things was to prevent "misinformation" from spreading so quick that it caused great damage to those who heard it before it got refuted. Democrats claim this (misinformation) was why Trump won in 2016, so they put pressure on FB to not let it happen again.

FB bowed down to their masters and starting heavily redacting and editing ANY positive information about Trump, and began suppressing any NEGATIVE information about Biden (Laptop from Hell).

This new 'ban everything deemed misinformation' rule was supposed to only last until the election, but now that people have accepted it, they've happily continued and expanded it to include any post containing information they don't agree with. This goes for any social media site, including Amazon, Google, and Twitter.

When the slippery slope argument is ignored, you find yourself quickly headed towards the cliff, and I fear that it may be too late to stop