Black holes are thought to be information destruction not loss. Things moving super far away are lost but should still be out there, things falling into a black hole disappear and then once the black hole evaporates are gone forever. Or at least that use to be the theory.
It sounds a mistake to me, thinking that black holes' contents are still "out there". They are no longer observable, just like the galaxies that are no longer observable due to expanding universe.
In both cases it is due to curvature of space, so I think these are essentially the same case.
I would definitely like to hear something verifiable on why there's a difference and why only one of these susceptible to information paradox.
Take that galaxy that just crossed our "observable universe horizon" so that we can't see it. If there is a civilization halfway between Earth and that galaxy, they can still see that galaxy. The galaxy can see that second civilization and so can we. There isn't a single fixed "observable universe" boundary in space, it's just relative to the observer.
With a black hole, it is different. There is no point that can see both sides while being seen from both sides,. If you are outside the black hole, you see nothing from within. If you are inside, then you can see the inside (this is speculation) and you also see the outside. It's a very clear boundary.
This is known to be not correct. When you are near the event horizon, you can still observe most of our ordinary observable universe, as well as subset of black hole's interior.
This is the direct reason/consequence of not being able to observe the event horizon when near it, or notice when you cross it.
The boundary is not clear, it depends on the observer.
