Sure, until these social platforms decide that they want to “fact check” content on their platforms — which converts them from the “town square” to “publisher” with a point of view. If they want protection under this section then they need to not interject with their point of view on the content published by their users. You seem to have forgotten this key detail.
If the word fact has to be placed in double quotes, then it's...not a fact.
Also, social is also not a public "town square." It's a private soapbox, like a gazebo at the shopping mall. The leaseholder can choose what you get to say when you stand on that soapbox in the food court, whether you pay rent, or simply want to buy a hot dog.
Remember 'No shirt, no shoes, no service.'?
Well, if they choose to censor people who say racism is cool, the Holocaust never happened, inciting violence is awesome, that an election is fraudulent or that bacon isn't the most divine meat ever, then it's their prerogative. It's a private square.
Though I would agree that applications of their filters are not rendered equitably, at the end of the day I don't pay for their service. FB and Twitter are free. And since I don't get paid for my 120 characters of philosophical gold, they aren't a "publisher." Even if they were considered a publisher...they are still a private entity and can do as they wish as long as it doesn't meet the measures of libel or slander.
If you don't agree with their policies, then you can always find another square to post "facts."