Link to tweet

and he can't afford fresh ones.

"...cautioning that it was sometimes very easy for private organizations to draw a line between constitutionally protected free speech and the slanderous ravings of a bloated lunatic hawking snake oil supplements."

Even free speech has limits.

Link to tweet

And the 1A exists specifically to protect speech that offends you. Each of you.

https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2018/08/google-and-facebook-are-regulating-speech-by-booting-alex-jones-and-their-power-to-do-so-is-a-problem.html

Watch how quickly the worm turns if, say, Bill Maher were censored by Facebook tomorrow.

The Onion is wicked satire, but it is still satire. Does anyone really believe conservatives who previously hung on Jones' every utterance will now resort to "measured and well-thought-out public discourse"?

Censorship is still censorship, even you're scarfing down the other guy's barbecued ox. Yours will be dinner next week.

Not business. As long as Facebook, et al, are regarded as business they can remove whomever they wish.

But FB has morphed into something much more sinister than the sociopathic corporations that currently own our feckless government, as much as the banks and pharmaceutical companies do.

You're right in that a corporate Supreme Court would see it your way. Your dry legal contention is accurate; it just does not address what has developed.

Click on the link I posted and read it. We're headed for bigger problems if we let FB decide who gets seen, read, heard, and who doesn't. And we may be past the point of reigning that in, so ... if they're just a business, as you point out, then my option is to stop doing business with them. Which I did, months ago.

These are two wholly separate concepts, regardless of the worms or oxen you prepare for dinner.

"The Onion is wicked satire, but it is still satire..."
Who is arguing otherwise?

that would make my day