[dextralt]

Hell yes I support waterboarding terrorists. There's no way the definition of 'terrorist' will ever change. There's no way it will be ever done to me.

Hell yes I support civil forfeiture with no due process. There's no way it will be ever done to innocent people.

Hell yes I support the executive branch getting more and more power. There's no way someone terrible would ever be the President and use that power.

and now:

Hell yes I support corporations policing free speech. They are on our side! There's no way it will ever be done to me or people I like.

do you get the idea?

Am I a fucking terrorist sympathizer if I speak out against torture and extrajudicial indefinite detention? No. I don't give a shit about them, but whatever I support done to them might be done to me.

Am I a fucking Nazi sympathizer if I speak out against abuse of power by unaccountable private entities? No. I don't give a shit about them, but whatever I support done to them might be done to me.

[Latty]

Your first examples are all completely different. The government should not be able to punish the expression of ideas (usual caveats, calls to harm, etc...), no.

Beyond the government? It's just not that simple. The solution is compelled speech? If I run a company, I have to broadcast people calling for my death, for example?

Should Blizzard be forced to allow anyone to say anything on their show? What if someone starts promoting a competing product? How do you deal with who is allowed to demand airtime on their particular thing? What proportion of exposure are given bits of speech given?

I'm not saying there aren't issues with companies having control over speech—this case is absolutely an example of that—but you are pretending that compelling companies to allow any speech is simple.