The same could be said about mobile phones and electricity though, they're not compulsory to use but pretty universal (and regulated). Certainly Whatsapp and Google Search have so much marketshare in my country (Netherlands) that they might as well be utilities.
Something like a common carrier model might be better for society, where the bundling of some services is deemed to be too monopolistic in combination but not as separate entities. Sort of like Rockefeller owning both oil production and (almost) all the transportation facilities and used the transportation to squeeze out fellow producers.
The Google search mention is ridiculous. The switching costs are negligible (type a different URL) and there are no network effects forcing you to use it.
Utilities are regulated the way they are because switching costs are enormous (pay for powerlines to some other generation source or pipes to a new water supply).
> I have never experienced peer pressure to use Google
If you read again, you will see that I was making a combined argument about Google and Facebook. For Google mostly the network effect applies, peer pressure maybe not at all. (edit: Google search does get better the more people use it, though. This could be considered hidden peer pressure.)
> and have been asked to message someone on Facebook maybe twice.
So? Obviously it's not equally popular in all areas and demographics.
> It sounds like you just like both services a lot and want the government to step in so you can have your cake and eat it too.
I meant precisely what I said, not what you chose to hear.
It sounds like you just like both services a lot and want the government to step in so you can have your cake and eat it too.