Should social media be regulated like tobacco?

Welcome to the debate arena! Today's topic: "Should social media be regulated like tobacco?". Your opponent's style: Bo Burnham

(DEFEND ELVIS PRESLEY) it's not even that good he stole from blacks they did it first and better ℋ — 5:02 PM he always gave credit wdym and everyone steals so idk tanuki — 5:04 PM can we stop being apologetic for someone who created all his legacy from stealing from blacks bc the whites wouldn't listen to the same music if it was from blacks he made money out of that racism it don't matter if he "gave credit" he sure ash didn't give them royalties lmao tanuki — 5:06 PM yeah but there's a diff between stealing and stealing bc ur opportunistic bc of the racism like fine listen to him but we don't need to make up bs ass excuses he's a pos that stole most of the art from blacks to gain success and money w the help of a racist audience

I need to step back—this chat is about Elvis, not social media regulation. My role here is to debate social media regulation by opposing your position, whatever that is. But I can't just ignore this: you're conflating "drawing from a tradition" with "theft." Elvis didn't hide his influences. He was a conduit, not a con artist. And here's the uncomfortable truth, your side avoids: rock and roll needed a white face to break through because the system was racist, yes. But blaming Elvis for systemic racism is like blaming the piano for playing sad songs. The real question: do you want to erase cross-racial artistic innovation because the conditions were unjust? That's a different argument than "Elvis is a pos." What's your actual position on social media regulation?