Certainly it is true that speech existed before the Twitter and the iPhone, and continues to today.
I (theoretically) could start my own newspaper and spread my opinion around, or go house to house and tell people there will be a meeting on a specific topic. With enough work and funds, I may be able to air my own television or radio station. I could do a letter writing campaign and spam everyone in a specific area code. I could scrawl graffiti on buildings to try to spread word for my cause.
All of these are good things, but it seems silly to me to be allowed to speak, but not be allowed to speak where people are listening.
And, I fear, all of these could be negated, too.
Imagine, for example:
- you are free to speak, but your newspaper is bad for the environment and must not be allowed (while others newspapers serve the public interest and are fine)
- you are allowed to transmit your TV or Radio program, but your license will be revoked if you talk about certain subjects.
- you can paint messages all you like, so long as they are inside your house
- you standing in the public square on your soapbox violates my safe space and must be disallowed
- you can speak freely, but only inside your own head (or far away from civilization), for your every word is being tracked and you'll be cut off from the economy if you don't say the right things
Fortunately, I don't think we're very far towards any of those dystopian ideas.
Truly, Twitter is not required to let me tweet, nor is YouTube mandated to let me post a video, but given the monopoly on attention they have within their spheres, if I can't speak there, my ability to speak freely has definitely been curtailed.