Private companies cannot prevent you from speaking. A private company can only refuse to help you, not suppress your speech. Only government can do that -- when the First Amendment is gone.

Censorship is a political/legal concept. Mixing private action with government action in an invalid concept in the form of a package deal, leading to such absurdities as the rationalizations for government control of private companies contrary to the First Amendment.

Private companies have no power to deny freedom of speech. Government control does not solve anything, it only moves a market battle for disseminating ideas to new laws, court decisions and bureaucracy controlling all of us. Minority views on individualism cannot win in that atmosphere of political control.

That is the point Tucker was making, when a business becomes so commanding of a specific medium for communications, it does begin to fall into specific regulation and rights and responsibilities, hence the Telecommunications Act in its various incarnations.

You don't get out much, do you? Or do you not ever watch the news? Remember the baker? Remember the states who passed laws saying you CANNOT discriminate against a person based on sex? In other words, Government discriminated against the businesses right to do business with who the want, they ARE REQUIRED by government to do business with EVERYONE. That is pretty discriminatory against the business owner.

Actually, I upvote every comment in a post I am either posted to, or posting in, so I know I read it and to recognize the person for their effort, however misguided or skewed. Since you seem to be committed to a Pearl Harbor mentality, I leave you to it, just make sure you have a bunker deep enough when the bombs start falling.

Could happen, if your number ended up in a data base of "unreliables", you could magically find you get an awful lot of dropped calls, like, all of them. It's all digital and programmed, that's how they can eavesdrop on you so easily.

A valid tactic, IF there is not a controlled market. Since Google controls 80% of what you get on the net through all their storage services, and search services (which are embedded in 80% or more of the web sites), you DONT get a choice. Go try to find a platform with a10th of the traffic of YouTube.....you won't find it, even if it exists. it's call "monopoly".

Beyond a doubt.

"If any technology that received government funding at some point in its development were grounds for denying all subsequent private ownership then government would be in complete control and there would be no freedom of speech left for anyone. "
Uh, I am pretty sure that is the point we are making. Thanks for agreeing. Good job.

Hey we got down sacked for the truth , some one doesn’t believe their lying eyes. Clearly Eric Schmidt is working with The North Koreans photo In my comment above.

I am sorry but you are not completely correct. While it is true that governments can censor so can companies also sensor. From Merriam -Webster Dictionary
Definition of censor (Entry 2 of 2)
transitive verb
: to examine in order to suppress (see SUPPRESS sense 2) or delete anything considered objectionable
censor the news
also : to suppress or delete as objectionable
censor out indecent passages
Examples of censor in a Sentence
Noun
Government censors deleted all references to the protest.
Verb
The station censored her speech before broadcasting it.

Even as they deny yours.

This is not a matter of censorship, which is a political/legal concept. Only government, not private individuals or companies, can engage in censorship. There is no 'freedom of speech' right to use someone else's property to broadcast ideas that the owner does not support. This has been recently discussed here, despite populist conservative 'downvoting' of Ayn Rand, at https://www.galtsgulchonline.com/post...

"Funding by DARPA" is irrelevant. DARPA is not responsible for google. If any technology that received government funding at some point in its development were grounds for denying all subsequent private ownership then government would be in complete control and there would be no freedom of speech left for anyone.

Private property rights do not "stop when in trade with the public". Private property rights make trade possible.

Freedom of speech is a political concept that pertains only to government interference. There is no Constitutional right to use someone else's forum to broadcast anything you want to regardless of the standards and purpose of the owner. That is the general principle https://www.galtsgulchonline.com/post...

Saw this live the other night and immediately thought Tucker was too polite to Mr. Greenwald. Doubtful he really is familiar with Mr. Crowder. His diatribe simply ate up time on Tucker Carlson's program. Tucker didn't reveal Glenn Greenwald and his message. Some good came from it though. Greenwald hybridizes the truth.

A corporation is a voluntary association of individuals. People don't lose their rights by voluntarily joining together. That is not "false logic". The size of a group does not change that it is composed of individuals with rights.

Private forums on the internet do have guidelines, including this one, and offenders have been removed (but not enough). If someone doesn't like it he can leave. Few bother to stay for a discussion when the purpose of a forum is subverted by burying proper posts in a sea of garbage tolerated by the owner who put a lot of effort into creating a forum for a stated purpose.

somehow I cant see how replacing global warming and its bad effects with socialism with even worse effects. I would say 12 years of socialism would do more damage than 12 years of greenhouse gasses

No, there is no excuse to deny the free speech of the property owners.

We also helped get rid of those National Socialists. An extremely progressive and militant group that wanted to expand their ideology to a global level.
If they just told everyone that the climate is changing and the earth would end in 12 years and only Global Socialism could save us all, maybe they would have gotten enough fools to believe them and the world will be speaking German.

The left simply wants to control everyone to think and act as they do. Forget that... The USA got rid of England, and can do the same with the left.

I think Infowars dude was right He was the frist big one to fall because he HAD their number. Thats why they cut him off of social media. Its rampant today, even to the point of cutting off Judge Jeanine for simply asking the question if a muslim congresswoman held the sharia law higher than our constitution. As long as we have anonymous voting, the quiet majority can still win like they did in 2016. The deep state IS crooked and needs to go

“Your call could not be completed as dialed because we disagree with what you believe! Don’t bother trying to dial the number again. This is a recording.”

Peter, I totally agree. These are privately own companies. Do we really want the gov't to step in and control them? Or do we consumers simply stop being their customers? I choose the latter.

There is a point at which a private business becomes so ingrained in our society that it becomes a utility. Should private utilities be regulated, and what is the threshold? It is an interesting question for our age.

Should private utility companies not be regulated?