I believe you entirely miss the point of that decision. IT was nothing to do with the freedom of the press: it's still free whether corporations are "people" or

I believe you entirely miss the point of that decision. IT was nothing to do with the freedom of the press: it's still free whether corporations are "people" or not in law. What changed was the ability of non-press organisations to use money as a proxy for speech to buy up "freedom of speech" through expensive media campaigns. This is the problem of gross inequality that this decision made.