[TulliusCicero]

Free speech is fundamentally about the government restricting your speech, not private platforms. There is no constitutional right to post on Facebook.

Amazing how certain people do their best to ignore this, every single time.

[ipaddr]

There are laws the restricting speech. There are laws for preventing people from platforms in some cases.

Talk of what's in the constitution doesn't really matter. This person may seem not protected but a different government could go after meta for foreign influence.

It's also a lesson not to trust companies who have a global presence because they are as good as who they do business with.

[TulliusCicero]

Nonsensical comment. It's barely even coherent.

[iamnothere]

Freedom of speech also prevents the government using jawboning or implied threats to bully private companies into doing their will. Government doesn’t always need the cover of law to accomplish something.

[TulliusCicero]

True, if the government is leaning on private actors then that's also an issue of free speech, because it's still ultimately at the behest of the government.

[mystraline]

> Free speech is fundamentally about the government restricting your speech, not private platforms.

A corporate charter is granted at the BEHEST of the People and the Government.

They are at best an artificial entity, and should be an extension of the laws binding government.

Frankly, the current situation of "You can say whatever you want legally (well, not really), but your job will fire you for it and youll end up in a homeless encampment". Yeah, thats real freedom.

So basically its real freedom for the Musks and Trumps of the world to sieg heil on stage, but fuck the citizenry for their attempt at speaking out.

[TulliusCicero]

It's not specific to corporations, it's any sort of private group.

Free speech is the government not punishing you for saying something they don't like, not private actors forced to give you a soapbox.