Can I just take issue with this part.Carl Tuckerson wrote: ↑Tue Aug 13, 2019 11:18 pmThings I have said:
+ A subset of leftists, including those who are the subject of the OP, do want to eliminate free speech for people with whom they disagree.
<snip>
Saying I radio hosts should not offer a platform to certain people, is not an infringement of their free speech.
At least in law, there is no obligation on the likes of Facebook, twitter, youtube, or any radio station to offer a platform to anyone. The counter position could be to argue for those media (or some media outlet) to be made a public body (state controlled, or owned) where freedom of speech is guaranteed to everyone.
Private entities can withdraw your speech rights, like a banning on this forum for what ever reason this entities want (for example breach of the forum rules). This would not qualify as a freedom of speech issue.
Entities like the BBC (or publicly owned TV and radio station) also do not have to put me on if I happen to want to talk about something. They decide if whatever the topic is of public importance... And this is arguably bias, they choose the opinions which are worth amplifying. Not tue same as government censorship (what independence the BBC has from the government of the day is an open exercise for the viewer...)