The fundamental problem with "Facebook must be regulated!" as an answer to FAcebook censorship is that it's the governments censoring Facebook in the first place.
I'm not opposed to regulation (and some of those you list are smart, eg data ownership), but expecting government regulation of facebook to somehow prevent governments from getting people kicked off facebook (which is the initial problem discussed in this threat)...yeah, somehow it does not appear to be a solution.
If the regulations are "all organisations must provide a copy of all data held about an individual on request in a common format" and / or "all organisations must delete all data held about an individual on request" then I would be all for it. If the regulations are "facebook (but not CFC) must censor calls for regime change in the US, and must not censor calls for regime change in Iran" then this is where I would have a problem. It seems that we are talking about something more like the latter than the former.
Well, yes. My comments here are specifically quite off-topic. When it comes to government censorship, government-backed regulations aren't going to matter.
My points are really only on market regulation of the largest networks, to make sure that the market continues to work.
As for government censorship... That's a policy and voter issue, in democracies. Any company or individual must by necessity obey the rules and regulations of the government where they are hosted, even if that includes censorship. And in this case, there's not much to do until Facebook decides to be primarily located in another country, and also choose to disregard legal orders from the US and Israel.
Facebook and Twitter aren't monopolies though.
There's many other social media websites out there too. Where do you draw the line? And why would we only do this only with social media and no other types of websites? How do you even define what is social media and what isn't? There's too many problems with your idea, and what, just so that you can say what you want on facebook? You can already do that, just not where you want.
Utilities are a necessity, that's why they're treated differently. They're not a luxury, like facebook or twitter.
As I said, unless I check Facebook enough, I lose out in real life. Twitter is arguably not as important, but Facebook is important. Facebook is a de facto monopoly, and needs to be regulated.
As for the line, choose anything like "over a billion unique users", "three largest networks in unique users or activity or revenue", or "any network with more than 66% users/population in any given area". Do some studies as to which line would have the best effect, and fewest side effects, and choose that one.