What if a private entity owns the town square?
Meanwhile, the size of mob needed to get something/someone deplatformed seems to be getting smaller as deplatforming tactics continue to be optimized.
Great. How do you intend to accomplish this, practically speaking?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marsh_v._Alabama
Regulating corporations is common and I suspect you fully support regulation in many circumstances (such as utilities). It seems bizarre to me why people think speech should somehow be exempt.
What if the private entity is suppressing speech at the behest of the government?
This isn't reddit.
Harassed - online, tell them to get over it. In person (i.e. someone is actually harassing you in real life), call the police because we already have laws against that.
Doxxed - If someone posts actual protected information, then sue them if you can. If someone just posts public information, then I don't see what the issue is.
Revenge-porned - If someone makes secret recordings of someone without their permission in a situation where that person would reasonably expect privacy, then that should be a crime. If someone makes a sex tape with someone willingly and hands ownership/control of said tape to that person, then you should have to live with the consequences of your actions. Don't make sex tapes. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Go to the police, because most states have laws against revenge porn: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Revenge_porn#United_States
The problem I believe is that people don't understand that freedom and security not only don't go hand-in-hand, but they are often diametrically opposed. We can do something about direct or indirect inciting of violence. Being bullied, trolled, harassed and doxxed may be illegal if it can be shown that violence toward an individual or a group was the specific intent. But offending someone is not enough, at least not in the U.S.
Other place, certainly. Many places have laws against insulting another person, offending their dignity or decorum <-- I'm literally quoting.
However, America also has a long ways to go with regard to freedom of speech.
In 2022, the U.S. ranked 42nd in the "Reporters Without Borders Press Freedom Index"
Very sad.
One of the common threads I've noticed across many people when trying to explain why defending freedom of speech, and the free and open exchange of ideas in general, is that they're not just defending some "right-wing" person's rights, they're actually defending their own rights. Because the same tactics and rationales that are being used to suppress and silence the "right-wing" (which is comically everyone to the right of Bernie Sanders these days) will eventually be turned around and used to silence and suppress them.
But so many people simple can't wrap their head around it.
The notion is perfectly illustrated by Sir Thomas More in A Man for All Seasons:
William Roper: “So, now you give the Devil the benefit of law!”
Sir Thomas More: “Yes! What would you do? Cut a great road through the law to get after the Devil?”
William Roper: “Yes, I'd cut down every law in England to do that!”
Sir Thomas More: “Oh? And when the last law was down, and the Devil turned 'round on you, where would you hide, Roper, the laws all being flat? This country is planted thick with laws, from coast to coast, Man's laws, not God's! And if you cut them down, and you're just the man to do it, do you really think you could stand upright in the winds that would blow then? Yes, I'd give the Devil benefit of law, for my own safety's sake!”
By protecting the rights of everyone, even people you disagree with, you are ultimately protecting your own rights. Anything else is short-sighted and dangerous.