The government is specifically restricted by the Constitution in order to convey Rights to citizens.
Just as the FBI does not have Constitutionally protected free speech rights to request censorship of citizens, no matter how politely requested, the FBI can not legally "request of you" to report to prison for five years in the absence of being convicted of a crime.
As any such request carries the presumption of force.
This restriction protects the Constitutionally protected Rights of citizens.
I can request that you report to prison. That is protected speech. I can request that speech be censored. That is protected speech.
The government is not an individual with Constitutional Rights. It is the entity that the Constitution exists to protect individuals against.
The opposite is true.
The Constitution's protection of individual citizen free speech very specifically is a restriction on the government (and its officials acting in government capacity, which is how the government speaks) from acting to limit the speech of citizens under most circumstances.
Which is exactly the case in question.
This is how Constitutional protections work. They limit the capacity of the government and its officials in order to protect the Rights of individual citizens.
Case law has long held that even the politest censorship request by the government is viewed as threat of force.
The propaganda around this issue is weak to the point of being insulting.