Jack, thanks for your comments.

In my defense, I fully acknowledged in my original article the point you are making here. I wrote: "This article is not about defending Donald Trump, nor am I questioning the right of private entities to make their own policies. It would be nice if such entities were consistent in their stated policies, but private companies should generally have a right to moderate content as they see fit."

So...I fully understand that private companies are not covered by the First Amendment.

I'm simply saying that high-profile stories about or related to censorship give us an important opportunity to have some conversations about free speech.

As for your point about the Nazis, Nuremberg, etc., please note that the title of my article is "Censorship is Rarely The Answer" not "Censorship is Never The Answer."

I acknowledge that it's sometimes necessary - certainly for private companies - to regulate speech and even censor speech.

But it's a slippery slope that we should be extremely cautious about -- especially when one considers that huge companies which are near monopoly status (if not outright monopolies) have more influence (practically speaking) on public expression than even the government.

Restrictions on speech are sometimes necessary, but we should err, as much as possible, on the side of free speech. Otherwise, I'm reminded of the words of George Washington...

"For if Men are to be precluded from offering their Sentiments on a matter, which may involve the most serious and alarming consequences, that can invite the consideration of Mankind, reason is of no use to us; the freedom of Speech may be taken away, and, dumb and silent we may be led, like sheep, to the Slaughter."

Blessings!