Strange argument your making there. One of the interesting side effects of free speech rights is also the prevention of forced speech. After all how can you have free speech if someone else can force to express views you don’t hold?
Why should my right to free speech trump your right to not be forced to speak? Equally what right to I have to force any corporation to publish and distribute speech they don’t agree with?
Based on the argument your making, you’re saying that I have the right to go to your home, plaster it with posters that you disagree with, then prevent you from removing them.
I don't see how I am forcing you as a person to say a damn thing. You've entered into a new level of tactical nihilism here.
> you’re saying that I have the right to go to your home, plaster it with posters that you disagree with, then prevent you from removing them.
How is your personal home the same thing as a gigantic, billion-user social network that has effectively (especially in 2020) replaced the pub, the bar, the town square, and the public forum? It's not, and you know it isn't.
Step back and look at yourself: you're defending the right of billion dollar corporations to tell you what you can and cannot say.
> How is your personal home the same thing as a gigantic, billion-user social network that has effectively (especially in 2020) replaced the pub, the bar, the town square, and the public forum? It's not, and you know it isn't.
I think the scale is a good point (no idea what your original post contained since it was flagged before I read it). Twitter and a handful of other social media companies handle (by which I mean "choose who gets to see what content") such an enormous volume of speech that its moderation policies can influence elections and therefore public policy. Moreover, their power is inherently anti-competitive--users can't take their network to another platform because these platforms don't interoperate by design. It seems like this is an antitrust issue, especially since these networks tend to lobby together to protect their interests.
It’s a bulletin board with a bunch of hired people with megaphones around it. The company decides which announcements the people with megaphones shout out. It’s free to decide not to.
Why should my right to free speech trump your right to not be forced to speak? Equally what right to I have to force any corporation to publish and distribute speech they don’t agree with?
Based on the argument your making, you’re saying that I have the right to go to your home, plaster it with posters that you disagree with, then prevent you from removing them.
Does that sound like free speech to you?