Ant has the right to free speech just like everyone else and he used it.

Sirius didn't stop him from saying what he wanted and they haven't tred to. They didn't obstruct his right to free-speech, they simply said "okay, go fuck yourself see you later. We're taking away this platform we gave you."

You have a right to free-speech, but you don't have a right to keep your job no matter what you say.

The right to free-speech doesn't mean the right to free-speech without consequences.

Should he have got fired? No.

Did Sirius obstruct his right to free speech? No.

Edit: This was posted on here earlier.

I'm fuckin amazed that this has to be said....again,especially around here.

@erratarob on why xkcd is wrong about free speech: http://blog.erratasec.com/2014/04/xkcd-is-wrong-about-free-speech.html

Free speech is to do with the government not being able to arrest you or seek to take legal action against you based on what you say or have said.

It has nothing to do with any type of company or organisation and how they can or can't block you.

Anything that isn't run or owned by another organisation.

Start your own website.

Start your own newspaper.

Go stand on a park bench and shout.

Buy a loudspeaker and walk down the street.

Hand out leaflets to people at the mall.

That's the problem today... You need a mass-media platform to reach any worthwhile audience, but any form of mass-media available to you is owned or run by someone else. So if you want to use their platform; you have to follow their rules.

If you don't want to use their platform, that's fine and no organisations will be able to block your right to say whatever you want. But you'll be talking to hardly anyone.

rekt

Set-up your own server. Same principle applies.

You're stuck on this point but you're missing the overall point that it's not a freedom of speech issue.

Edit...

If you set up your own server, who's line are you leasing?

Create your own global computer network then, that allows for the transfer of information and communication. Then sell your house, sell your car, stop paying taxes and go live on a boat in international waters while you're at it.

Either you're a troll or you just can't see the forest for the trees... If you want to utilise the resources of another organisation in any way at all; you have to comply to their terms of usage.

Good day, sir.

A man as common as you deserves to be heard by nobody. Your whole argument is, yeah, I have free speech, but I don't free access to broadcast whatever I want and suffer no consequences. That isn't free speech, you fool.

Free speech is to do with the government not being able to arrest you or seek to take legal action against you based on what you say or have said.

No. Freedom of speech is right you are born with. The government does not give it to you (not that you said it did). The First Amendment of the US Constitution only says the government can't infringe that right. Since it's a right, you always have it, at all times and in all places. The Constitution does not say that nobody else should infringe that right, but the implication is that nobody else should, since not even the government can do so.

"Since it's a right, you always have it, at all time and in all places." I was going to plead you research the issue, but your mind is made up. But just try shouting, "Fire!", in a movie theater. Better yet, I want to scream through your window about how Icelandic taxation is destroying the American frozen orange juice industry. What, you mean you want to call the cops because it's 3 am? Nuh uh, it's my freedom of speech, available at all times and places. Now, give me your phone, I don't care you have to pay the bill and you want to go to sleep, it's my freedom!

You know, it's not actually a right. I retract that statement and stand corrected. The First Amendment only refers to "freedom of speech" as something that exists independently of the document. Here's the full text:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

Of course, there are laws against shouting "Fire!" in a crowded theater. Nevertheless, freedom of speech does not apply only to your interaction with the government. You have it independent of the document. It is one of your freedoms (though not one of your rights).

I'm so happy to find someone like myself, willing to be corrected. Since you are such an intelligent man I don't think it would be a waste to inform you of something you may not have considered. The Constitution exists only between the government and the people, establishing various rights and freedoms, however, if a company or group tries to silence you through boycotting or firing it is not a violation of free speech. After all, that is THEIR freedom of speech. You must deal with the consequences of what you say, and no one is obligated to help you say it.

It doesn't matter if there are 0, you're not entitled to five, or even one, free, worldwide form of expression. You, basically, want to make anyone who owns communication property your slave. You want to be able to take their work and property without regard to their desires.

Not very bright, are you?

Voting. Seeking redress in court. Artistic expression. (They can refuse to host it, or pay for it, but nobody can stop you from making it.) Voicing an opinion in public (They can refuse to host it, yada yada, but Sirius can't force ant to take the posts down) Parody.

This isn't technically a free speech issue. They're not trying to shut Ant up, or make him take his comments down. they're just choosing to not do business with him. Whether that's legal, per contracts, is up for debate.

The free speech issue is coming into play with the cunts on Twitter and in blogs trying to shut Ant down, and accusing him of things he didn't say. I'm betting one really juicy libel case comes out of this.

I didn't say that, Francine. Cool your panties.

You aren't even entitled to one, where the Hell did you get this 5 concept?

Yes, it is, you dumb fuck, because they're freedom of expression involved firing Ant.

His speech has not been blocked. His means to broadcast his speech over someone else's hardware has.

I'm not going to do your, or Anthony's homework for you. Quite honestly, I just don't care enough to do so.

But I'll give you a hint. The 5 platforms that are privately owned that aren't required by law to protect the profits of public shareholders, and can afford not to buckle under public pressure.

I'm afraid you didn't read his post correctly.

He said he would not do your homework, nor Anthony's, for either of you.

The only ones I can think of are purely public (standing on an orange crate and declaiming), or completely self-contained (the aforementioned support groups) or DiY (putting out your own print publication or doing a ham radio show).

Other words, you're not going to reach significant numbers of people without some form of corporate sponsorship/control.

An incest survivors support group.

Daddy can find something to shut that mouth up, honey.

You mean that no company can conceivably (as well as legally) block?

I freely confess I don't understand the question.

A soapbox in the village green.

People think that the only way you can be anti-free speech is if you think that it should be against the law to say certain things, but that isn't true. You can be against something and still think that it should be legal. If you don't want certain things to ever be said, and you want people to be punished if they do say them, you're anti-free speech. You may not think that free speech should be illegal, but you're still against it. It doesn't have to be a first amendment issue, and there's no law that says you can't be against free speech if you want to be, but you ARE against free speech. Stop pretending that you're not just because you don't want it to be illegal.

And, for what it's worth, I think most people who are anti-free speech would make it illegal to say things they don't like if they could. They just know they'll never win that battle, and so they try to find other ways to have people punished for saying things that they don't like.

Adam Carola doesn't kowtow to anyone anymore. So a podcast. He seems to make money with it now.

I do think there is going to be a time where Apple starts giving the boot to racist/sexist/homophobic podcasts.

There was one time where Adam Carolla said "yuck" when talking about transgender people. But he apologized for that. Maybe he did get informed that that sort of thing could get his podcasts yanked from distribution channels. That's just my speculation.

Yep. Well said.

You must realize that people who own companies have a freedom of speech too, right? A freedom of expression? It is important for them to able to express what they want, and they expressed this by firing Ant. The question you keep repeating is as asinine and useless as the old Christian standby, "Can you prove atheism is true and correct?" That's not how it works, asshole. You can't make me give you my radio station, or my cables, or printing press. Go buy/make your own, dick.