it does seem legitimate to ask whether mere speech may be more potentially harmful in modern times, when any person's speech can have much greater reach than ev

it does seem legitimate to ask whether mere speech may be more potentially harmful in modern times, when any person's speech can have much greater reach than ever before and with much shorter latency. Maybe our norms do need to be adjusted for this. But my standard answer would be that verbally "condemning" someone doesn't create any legal consequences for their speech or concretely materially harm them, so it doesn't reduce their freedom of speech.