[pclmulqdq]

The First Amendment applies only to government, but the idea of free speech applies to everyone. It has also come out recently that social media platforms are receiving directions from the US government about what content to take down, making them state actors.

[tptacek]

This is an article about the implications of the First Amendment and their applicability to private entities, not about the amorphous concept of "free speech".

[PM_me_your_math]

Yet for practical purposes, the US gov has been interfering and dictating which speech can be posted on social media. Both twitter and facebook have takedown portals for government officials. I suspect others do as well. Back door channels between gov agencies and companies exist and influence what gets exposure. Such channels even led to a major news organization being censored and temp-banned, despite having a legitimate story of national interest. This is a major issue, and I'll tell you why, even though I believe I don't have to:

In the past, journalists were the check against government over-reach, corruption, and fraud. That has been thrown out the window, as it is clear to the objective observer that the majority of media and government work very closely together to push a coordinated narrative, and have been for some time.

When citizen journalists emerged, whistleblowers and independent bloggers began publishing stories (some of them trash, others being very good at what they do) - yet they rely on social media for reach. If their stories oppose the narrative of both mainstream media and government, they are labeled (without any real evidence) as misinformation or "russian" propaganda. This in itself is propaganda.

Frankly, I'm tired of the nanny state. Neither myself or any other functional adult needs media, government, or party to tell us what to think, do, or say. The whole mess is antithetical to the core principles of the United States.