Twitter, Reddit, Facebook, etc. should have no right to censor public discourse.
twitter is the Wild West right now, full of bots and comments that violate rules but take a while to get enforced.
Blocks solve that. But also deprive people of being able to hear announcements.
Splitting the ability to listen to a broadcast and the ability to broadcast on a broadcast seems sensible. You could, after all, be removed from a courtroom or government press conference for being disruptive.
I imagine this will more likely raise issue with the use of private social platforms for public statements rather than whether they can block comments.
The problem is that Twitter won't even let you link to a tweet by a user you've been blocked by. That's definitely not okay.
Politicians are going to start creating their own Safe Spaces so they don’t have to read any discontent or criticism. Maybe we can get Butters to do the moderation?
The second issue you mentioned is part of a broader legal issue about the degree to which the government burdens access to the government's speech. The question is not just "can you still access the speech through legal means?" but also "how difficult did the government make it for you to access the speech?"
If you get blocked then you don't see the posts unless you're logged out. This is due to the platform's implementation of blocking, but there it doesn't eliminate the First Amendment question about whether you can see the post. In order to know that a government official made a particular post you would have to periodically visit the government official's account page while logged out. If you weren't blocked you could have gotten notifications sent to wherever, or you could've watched your own feed at your leisure without having to check the official's account page like a hawk. By blocking you under these conditions, the government official would place a significant burden on your access to the speech (a First Amendment violation), even if the prohibition on access is not a complete block.