I think the confusion stems from the fact that it should be illegal for a private business to censor someone. But that does not preclude the democratically created law from censoring someone, as interpreted by the judiciary.
The issue in the US has been that the executive and judiciary part of the state did nothing for four years.
As per the first sentence of the article: "Polish government wants to protect posts that do not break nation’s laws"
The issue in the US has been that the executive and judiciary part of the state did nothing for four years.
As per the first sentence of the article: "Polish government wants to protect posts that do not break nation’s laws"