To the Journal editor:
Pity the poor president now cut off from Twitter, seriously restricting his ability to dispatch the endless flow of vile and dishonest statements.
It took an insurrection for Twitter and other companies to do what they could and should have done a long time ago. Maybe they would have if they were not so intimidated or focused on the enormous revenues generated by all that messaging.
Critics claim that this violates “free speech.” It does not. These companies have every right to bar the president’s or anybody else’s comments. The First Amendment limits government interference: “Congress shall make no law… abridging the freedom of speech…” The same amendment protects press freedom. That means that private media companies, like it or not, are at liberty to regulate content, setting their own policies and standards.
Is anybody asking why he even needs Twitter? He has the world’s loudest megaphone, the original bully pulpit. He could, like every other modern-day president, address the public through media statements and by routinely holding press conferences with himself present.
Clearly, he has not done this because he’s afraid of being questioned and held accountable for his actions. With Twitter he has been able to avoid all that while, at the same time, controlling the means to distort and manipulate.