First, it is essential to define what exactly we mean by a public utility in this context. Traditionally, public utilities are organisations that maintains the infrastructure and/or provides service for a basic utility, such as water and electricity. Therefore, to regulate social media as a public utility is to view it as a collection of organisations, in this case social media companies, that provides the service of communication, entertainment, and self-expression to its users. However, this is coupled with two rather problematic connotations. 1. As public utilities are usually run by monopolies within a region, it is a logical consequence of this claim that social media should be run like a monopoly, at least for each of its aforementioned key functions. This notion is deeply concerning as this curbs innovation within social media companies and gives social media companies control of a large proportion of the online population. 2. Public utilities are treated as essential organisations by law and policies alike, ergo social media, if regulated like public utilities, will grant social media some special, unmerited privileges and make them exempt from government scrutiny. Therefore, I claim that social media should not be regulated like a public utility. I will elaborate in my response message.

[No submission - Time expired]