Censorship on Social Media as it Relates to the First Amendment

 

First, it is interesting to note how social media companies can legally censor their users, in instances when they are trying to speak out against the government. In similar instances like former president Donald Trump's twitter account, which was banned after the January 6 riots at the capitol because his words were "dangerous." Freedom of speech protects you from censorship from the government, and is not absolute, for example you can't yell fire in a crowded theater. In the case of Donald Trump he, the government, was censored by a private company. Even though it wasn't his government account, he was still representing the government as president and it's ironic how the government can't censor private companies or citizens, but private companies can censor the government. The participation in self government value of free expression states that  citizens will not make wise decisions when candidates are censored and can't relay their positions. This was exactly the case with Donald Trump, but after the election. He wasn't censored until after the election when his supporters has already made their decisions at the polls. It is arguable that he was engaged in the same "dangerous" behavior when he tweeted to Black Lives Matter protestors "when the looting starts the shooting starts" as when he called for his supporters to "fight" at the capitol to try and overturn the election results. This leads to the debate of whether or not he incited a riot, which is not protected speech under the first amendment. That is what the whole debate on Donald Trump's second impeachment was about.

We know that it is legal for private companies to censor individuals and even the government. The question now is when they are censored by these private social media companies, who do they turn to to voice their free, but not absolute, speech since social media is the main and biggest platform that everyday people use to convey messages.