Since tech is owned by anti-American far-lefties that hate the 1A (Free Speech), 2A (Freedom of defense), 3A (Privacy in your home), 4A (no self incrimination / privacy of personal information), 9A (anything not enumerated is protected) and 14A (Due Process), some Americans are looking for alternative ways to communicate that doesn't rely on big tech, or at least the big tech that hates those freedoms. Here's a few alternatives.
Alternatives to Big Tech
BitChute - Bitchute is a UK based P2P (Torrent front-end) alternative to YouTube video sharing, created in 2017. A lot of conservative/right folks cross-post to BitChute, in case they are blocked by the crypto-fascists at Google. This insurance worked well for a few that were banned or demonetized for reasons unknown or imagined. Far left organizations like PayPal also joined the fray by banning them and the SPLC has criticized BitChute for some of its content. In a free speech zone, it's true that some content veers towards offensive/unsavory like Christchurch mosque shooting video or manifesto: but these facts/content is necessary to research and discuss topics from an informed point of view. Their complaint would be more valid if the same people complaining didn't propagate leftists hate themselves, or they at least stopped the pretense that they care about free speech.
Brighteon - I think this was once Real.Video as well, but now is Brighteon.com -- they were basically an alternative YouTube, but because people hosted historically factual but offensive things (like the Christchurch shooting video), they were threatened with de-platforming, so are working on alternatives.
Diaspora - Self-hosted Social Network founded in 2010 (funded via crowd funding / a Kickstarter campaign) in response to Facebook user spying. Diaspora is Greek for scattered (as in dispersed population).
Full30 - Basically, Gun YouTube that's in beta. Their contact and information is on a footer that you can't click on because it keeps auto-loading more content and moving it away when you try to click it.
Gab - Gab is a free-speech alternative to Twitter (and to a lesser extent), launched in 2016. The problem is a social network is only as good as its participants (and moderation). There's no moderation, and many of the users are disenfranchized, so while some content is great, the general quality control and tone can be worse than Twitter (which is low). And because Apple doesn't support Free Speech there's no iOS App, though you can use their web interface at gab.com.
GoWild - Instagram for the firearm friendly outdoorsman, with a few bloggy features. Mobile-only.
LBRY - LBRY is a secure content sharing and publishing platform (using blockchain) that is decentralized and owned by its users. That means it should get around most oppressive restrictions on content. It's also a micropayment system where you can buy/share content and charge for information/data. It's being used partly as an alternative YouTube.
Mastadon - Self-hosted Social Network (Twitter/Tumblr) started in 2016 to combat Facebook or Tumblr de-platforming/censorship.
MeWe - When Zuckerberg called privacy a “social norm of the past” (circa 2012), Mark Weinstein created MeWe: a privacy-centric alternative to Facebook. 4M users (circa 03/2019) is not exactly 2B of FB, but it is a signal that there are a fair amount of people looking for Social Media that doesn't require you buy into Zuckerberg's crypto-fascism. (Though honestly, it's not even that hidden any more).
Parler - (pronounced “par-lay”) was set up in 2018 as another free speech alternative to Twitter. Again, Social Networks are the sum of their audience, and for now, they're mostly attracting those kicked off other platforms: so a bit heavy on the anti-PC stuff labelled as Hate Speech, Anti-Semitism, anti-feminist or anti-Trans/LGBTQ. Still tiny (100K users as of 2019), but getting some high profile celebrities kicked off Twitter for not being Marxist enough.
Telegram - This started in 2013 as a Facebook free version of WhatsApp, for those who trust some Russian guy making his own security protocols more than Zuckerberg. But it's evolved into more a micro-blogging service than just point-to-point communications (broadcast channels, group chats, bots, etc). With 200M users (2019) it has a following.
I offer no warranty or testimony to any of them. The problem seems to be the number of folks that have moved has still been small and some are quite caustic -- which taints the audience pool. Most haven't achieved a real critical mass, through alternatives to YouTube is a lot easier to do than an alternative to Facebook/Twitter because of the dependence on the social graph (millions of users). So while I'm hoping that one gets that critical mass, we just aren't really there yet, and we won't be until I could tell my Mom or friends what my channel/page is, and expect them not to scoff or have to get a custom App just to access my information.