Michael Grossman

Red population is greater than gray.

The judicial viewpoints this WaPo report enumerates are all at least slightly off-target.

Someday, somewhere, somehow, some judge is finally going to grasp that freedom of speech is not freedom for one’s speech to be broadcast more widely by a second party.

The problem with seeing social media as “the public square“ is that it is anything but. It is a private mall, built for the benefit of the commercial interests who pay the rent. It’s not built to benefit the public, its job is to lure, engage, and retain them for use by the merchants who pay for their attention.

The only reason we are compelled to use it as a public square, is because we have no digital public space, nor any personal, unsurveilled digital private space. Our digital selves are homeless, and the shared spaces we can inhabit are ones in which we're captives to corporations.

Where are those desperately-needed analogs to home and public? You are free to say anything in your house. You can yell almost anything from your front porch. You can march to city hall and chant it. You can say it in a letter, in a phone call, in an email, or in a text.

That does not obligate a publisher to print what you say, nor can a broadcaster be told whether to transmit it.

You have freedom of speech, so do they.