The "Public Square" assumes the space is owned by... well the public. Either the town or city. That's not the case here. Even if it were, the reach of a person in the public square is tiny... a few hundred people if they are absolutely lucky.
Besides... your rights in actual public squares haven't changed a bit. Save the fact that COVID has shut down many public spaces.
> But then what if I start buying out every printing press in town?
You mean the way Clear Channel has actually bought up a huge percentage of radio stations?
The way big right wing corporations have bought up the majority of local television stations in the country?
Is it "fair" that the majority of television broadcast stations are owned by a few right-wing media companies?
For what it's worth, all three "competing" local broadcast television stations are owned by the same company now.
I'd love to know why people think it's super important that Facebook and Twitter cease their supposedly "biased" curating while so many broadcast companies which reach 10s of millions of homes get a free pass.
By the way, I don't think forcing broadcasters or social media to not police their content is the way to go - I'd much rather make sure they don't become monopolistic. The situation you describe with TV must not happen with social media too.
Is it more because it's conservative views being censored now?
American conservatives, being as... loud as they are, did make the issue more mainstream, but people have been bringing up these problems for as long as the internet has been around.
I'd love to see more variety in social media. Unfortunately network effects favor big single player. Also, every time a new entrant threatens, they get sucked up by an existing player. Sadly, since we've allowed Facebook to swallow everything which isn't bolted down, the only real competition seems to be Chinese owned[0].
(And I sympathize with foreign governments struggling with Facebook & Instagram being US owned).
[0] I have no qualms about Chinese people or even Chinese companies in general. But the way the Chinese government operates, I am skeptical of platforms based on speech.
Let me use your analogy, though.
Let's say there are many newspapers in town. Is it fair for me to refuse to publish certain things? Sure.
What if I own the only newspaper in town? It gets more complicated. But hey, perhaps the town has a thriving samizdat culture, so maybe it's fine.
But then what if I start buying out every printing press in town? And on top of that, what if I'm pressured by the mayor to not publish something? This is a big issue now, right?
How can that situation be addressed? People often suggest regulating that sole paper, but to me the answer is taking steps to ensure that we never end up with one newspaper in town. And we definitely don't let that paper control all of the printing presses.