Some people seem to have a very absurd notion of what counts as censorship. The first amendment protects the right to the free exchange of information. It does not guarantee you a venue. Private entities get to choose whether or not to facilitate your exchange of ideas or not.
I rather like the following quote by Doonesbury creator Garry Trudeau. “Censorship’s when the government gets involved. It’s called editing.” It more or less sums up the entire argument. According to the first amendment “Congress shall make no law…abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.” In no way does this demand that a private corporation, or individual must provide a venue in which to speak. Facebook, Twitter, and other social media platforms are not public institutions. They are privately owned entities and their owners have the right to choose what content is allowed and what content is not allowed. This is not censorship. This is editorial authority. Just as a publisher has the authority to limit what content is published, so does any other content provider or facilitator.
To demand that such an institution be required to allow any and all content is a violation of the owners’ rights and privileges. It is also authoritarian and a violation of the constitution. The people have a certain amount of power to make demands to content providers and facilitators. We can stop using their services. But that is the total extent of our power against them. Anything else is tyranny.
One caveat should be addressed. There has been an issue with Twitter, Facebook, et. al. being quite biased in their enforcement of their TOS. While it is still editorial power that they are expressing, and not censorship, it could be argued that what they are doing is violating a contract. Unless the TOS clearly states that the content facilitator may be biased in its application of the TOS, then the TOS, more than just a set of rules for the user, is a contract between the company and all its users that it will not permit certain content. Therefore enforcing the TOS in one instance, and not in another, is a clear violation of a contract.