That would be a fair argument, were it not for the fact that every candidate is being excluded from algorithmic recommendations.

Were it just one or two candidates, then it would indeed be a form of "soft censorship". That doesn't seem to be the case here.

What's wrong with saying that it's censoring every candidate?

	▲	matheusmoreira a few seconds ago \| parent [-]
		Censorship targets subversion. Censors seek to prevent the spread of antiestablishment information and ideas. So one can hardly claim that the a universal ban on algorithmic recommendation for all candidates is censorship.