[fritztastic]

I disagree. I don't think ads are the same as individual people being able to express themselves, and having one conpany reject political ads isn't preventing the politicians from expressing themselves altogether. Hulu also has discretion to choose which ads to air. Undoubtedly there are a great number of submissions, I'm sure not all of them make the cut for various reasons. What criteria should they use? Highest paying ads? Extending ad time to ensure all ads submitted can air? What if someone submitted an ad supporting ISIS or other extremist speech?

Should a business be forced to air content they don't want to be associated with or perceived as endorsing? It has already been established companies are not obligated to do business they find violate their 1A rights, so this would seem to fit into that precedent.

Moreover politicians aren't being silenced, there are a vast number of different avenues they can (and do) use to spread their campaign information.

If it's campaign ads being more equitably presented, there are a number of ways to approach this that don't involve forcing a private business to accept any and all ad content.