and their right as a private company
So discrimination by political affiliation is ok? How about selective use of one’s personal data based on political affiliation? How does a media company determine political affiliation? By what that individual says, right? By extension, one who exercises their free speech risks getting discriminated against and excluded by a potentially significant degree in a community conversation. Therefore, media companies are discriminating against those who exercise their right to free speech that does not agree with the media companies views.
It sounds like an attempt by certain media companies to influence public thinking and election results. I sense that “influencing election results” is a hot button for Democrats for some reason.
It used to be, before the Radical Left takeover of the Democratic Party, that free speech was championed by Democrats. In fact, there used to be protests against censorship by Liberals. How things change when you control most of the media, eh? Stalin and Hitler would be proud of the state our media is today.
A media company is required to have a license to operate. Part of the operating requirements a business agrees to in exchange for a license is to act in the public interest and act lawfully.
A business who discriminates on the basis of free speech against a certain class of people is not acting in the public interest and may already be violating specific Federal and or state laws. Of course, well defined and evenly applied hate speech provisions excepted.
We need to reign in suppression of free speech through the enforcement of either existing laws or the establishment of new laws that have teeth. Even if Federal Laws are deficient and remain that way for a while, states and cities can “do a California” or “ A San Francisco” as we have seen CA or CA city specific legislation on automobile emissions and sanctuary cities.
It is through the unhindered exchange of ideas that our society can continue to develop and grow.