"Free speech" is freedom from government reprisals. Nothing in the article relates to this, merely that private companies wish not to support Neo-fascists.
You can be upset about this, but please don't confuse it with Freedom of Speech.
You can be upset about this, but please don't confuse it with Freedom of Speech.
No. But they're free to have terms of service. I don't see how this is relevant.
Can you be more specific, especially with regards to private property and enterprise? Are you arguing that it's my human right to publish on the front of the NYT, or have my submissions on the front page of HN? Or to give speeches in your living room?
Also, I would oppose censorship in your particular examples. I would think that it is your right to publish in the NYT under the same terms as anyone else (i.e., be interesting or have money), to top HN (if upvoted), or to speak in my home (if invited). And if the NYT blacklisted someone speaking on corrupt reporting, if HN blocked stories because they were right-leaning, or an acquaintance refused to talk to me because they disagree with my politics, I would be rightly upset at them.
But, again this has nothing to do with freedom of speech; just your feelings.
So, next time something like this happens, instead of saying "but this is hurting freedom of speech" you can just say "but this is hurting my feelings; I believe I have a fundamental human right to feel good about things, and things are making me feel bad".