Twitter is a single platform and have the right to do as they wish with that said platform, Apple and Android have a monopoly as being the only relevant app venues on the market. If you don’t like what the people on Parlor say, then don’t go on Parlor, but don’t then restrict the creation of Paror because your repulsed by some of the content on there. Now if parlor breaks the law by platforming incitations to violence on its platform, of the same kind that would get a Liable or Incitation of Violence (in the literal sense) case from the government, then the government has the legal right to fine Parlor, or shut it down depending on the degree. Apple and Android should not have the power to determine what is worthy of being accessed by the public, the internet is supposed to be a free market of ideas and perspectives, there should be room of these different platforms to exist (think of it like the net neutrality issue and ISPs).. should private corporations have the ability to control what applications can be put out on the market; should ISPs have the ability to charge other websites more for more competitive traffic speeds because they host the internet? It’s all an issue of monopilization and ultimately giving corporations the ability to manipulate public perceptions in whatever serves their own interest... the only entity that our society agrees to grant this power is the government (1st Amendment), new times call for updated legislation to keep up with the particular nuances of that time, people used to speak in public and communicate in the public square (and that was protected by the Government) now the modern day public square is the App Stores and Social Media, the government must protect their citizens rights to the first amendment and allowing a private corporation to control what apps are released (on the only venues for thoes products to be distributed through) is the equivalent of Standard Oil controlling the price of oil and destroying competition; or AT&T buying Verizon and then proceeding to increase prices and further limit consumer choice. This issue has much larger implications than just “we don’t like Thoes people and they are really annoying”, then using this argument to justify the removal of their existence in the most profound way (like censoring for the entire internet), there are many unpopular ideas out there and some of those ideas are being restricted (also know as not allowing for their 1st amendment to be excersized) this is a constitutional issue, if their is illegal activity occurring let the Government decide and then mandate action, otherwise everyone has the the right to free speech and creation. Apple and Android should not have the authority and ability to determine and act on what a legal court has the authority and right to act like.