The crux of the issue he is describing is not that his speech rights are being violated, but that Google has the power to fire him from a company that is not pa

The crux of the issue he is describing is not that his speech rights are being violated, but that Google has the power to fire him from a company that is not part of Google. And that Google used that power in reaction to his speech. > If you don't like your employer, you can leave. That's how it works. End of story. And go where? Another similar company, right? While that isn't what happened in this specific situation, this guy brings up a valid point about monopolies: If you work for a company, and that company is a monopoly, you can't just leave, because you have literally nowhere else to go. Therefore that company has control over your speech without violating your constitutional rights. That is one of many reasons we should be concerned about the centralization of power Google/Alphabet has acquired. > The guy is publishing an article in a major news publication about his experiences during all of this. His free speech is quite obviously not being suppressed. His speech clearly was suppressed. Just because he found a new outlet for it does not mean anything to the contrary.