> A technical point: that doesn't imply you have the right to type whatever you want on some website or app It's not a technical point, it's a different point.

> A technical point: that doesn't imply you have the right to type whatever you want on some website or app It's not a technical point, it's a different point. I gave a slightly expanded definition of what is freedom of speech. You are now questioning whether freedom of speech is or should be a right, and if so, under what circumstances. > If a journalist edits an interview, is that censorship? That depends on whether they edited it to censor or not, as editing is not a synonym for censoring, nor for interfering. As the Oxford English dictionary helpfully states: > interfere | ɪntəˈfɪə | > verb [no object] > 1 intervene in a situation without invitation or necessity > 2 (interfere with) prevent (a process or activity) from continuing or being carried out properly If they edit for a good reason who could claim they were interfering or censoring? > Anyway, absolute freedom of speech doesn't exist and shouldn't exist. It's an insane idea. Should it exist in your own home?