Freedom of speech is irrevocably tied to how information actually spreads in a society. Inhibiting someone from accessing the superhighways of information is ef

Freedom of speech is irrevocably tied to how information actually spreads in a society. Inhibiting someone from accessing the superhighways of information is effectively suppressing their speech. In practise, if not in pedantic principle. If you weren’t allowed to drive on the highway, but everywhere else, would your freedom of movement not be suppressed, to some degree? If in North Korea they’d allow you to say whatever you want as long as you only shouted it from the top of a mountain when alone, or wrote it on a note and buried it in your backyard, would they have freedom of speech?