That's the question that's being asked.
And you can say people can vote with their feet, but what about when "voting with your feet" means permanently and significantly extricating yourself from your family and friends?
> They're more than free to start their own google/fb/apple competitors and gain market share...but good luck with that.
That's exactly the point. Through network effects, these companies have achieved monopolistic market positions on how American citizens communicate with each other.
If we're going by spirit of the law (as we often do with the law out of necessity, especially as technology advances), then clearly the spirit of the first amendment did not intend to nullify itself in a hypothetical future where all communications were privately owned by a handful of corporations.
If the telecoms all decided to put in speech recognition software that automatically terminated phone calls when it detected negative sentiment toward a particular political group or initiative, would you defend that?
What if UPS and FedEx decided to do the same to letters, and return them all to sender or burn them? They have a right to burn letters that criticize their favored candidate, because you agreed to it in the EULA. Don't agree to the EULA? You don't get to receive Amazon packages anymore. Would you defend that?
You will always have freedom of speech in your home, and you can always choose a free platform to share your thoughts on, even if you have to build it yourself from open source software.
What you actually are describing is government driven tyranny. UPS and FedEx and Facebook have no direct commercial interest in censoring you. The reason they take any interest in your parcels and posts is because our government and our legal system has required them to. They have been made liable if they ship your letter bombs or share your hate speech.
If you are afraid of a society where all corporations restrict your rights in concert, you are actually afraid of an overarching government without limits that's stripped you of your rights and uses corporations to extend it's reach. There is actually a name for this type of government, they call it Socialism.
I think you're thinking more of Fascism:
Definition: Fascism is a way of ruling that advocates total control of the people. ... Fascism comes from the Latin fascio, meaning “bundle, or political group.” In fascism, the people are looked at as a bundle — one body that must be controlled by the government with absolute force.
You might think the US is far from that, but right now we are spending 36% of our GDP on federal, state and local government , and the remaining 64% is heavily regulated and controlled by the government. In fact, you can argue that the federal government already "owns" over 1/3 of all private businesses given it's right to 35% of all their profits.
Where does it state that companies must allow free speech on their business property, or servers? It doesn't, it applies to GOVERNMENT entities and public lands/property.
If a Nazi steps foot on my PRIVATE property I can call the cops and charge with trespassing. Once they're on my property their freedom of Speech goes out the window. Same w/ google/fb et. al.
They're more than free to start their own google/fb/apple competitors and gain market share...but good luck with that.