It’s not about facts anymore, it’s about timeframes. Stall long enough and you can get away with anything.

I believe that Facebook and most social media goes out of their way to block conservative for rules violations and other things that they'd let Commies slide for, and this is a good collection of facts, but not exactly proof that their algorithms are biased (even though I suspect they are).

For instance, regarding the election...isn't it natural to assume that daily traffic for a lot of these entities would have fallen at some point even on a purely neutral platform after the election hype passed? How do we distinguish between a natural fall of traffic and Facebook bias?

If you can come up with a list of 10 socialist pages that are currently decreasing in traffic, would that be proof that Facebook censors socialists?

If you can come up with a list of 10 conservative pages that are currently increasing in traffic, would this be proof that Facebook is going out of their way to support conservatives?

Better tests of bias are things that you have complete control over and are duplicatable and repeatable. For example. Create a collection of Facebook accounts that Post It's Ok to be White content and It's Ok to be Black content. Then report those and see what percentage of each are banned. That would be closer to a repeatable proof of bias.

I mean an obvious answer to me is that no one cares about the election because it's over. I unsubbed from politics once the election was over because I didn't care anymore