In 1949, Federal Communications Commission (FCC) issued the Fairness Doctrine. This policy required broadcasters to present controversial issues of interest to the public, and to present both sides of the issue in a manner that was fair and equitable.
The policy was rescinded in 1987, and it ushered in conservative talk radio. Radio station owners could air three hours of Rush Limbaugh, and they were no longer forced to air three hours of Rachel Maddow to meet the dictates of the Fairness Doctrine. Station owners were free to use their property as they thought best, and that included the freedom to air those who expressed ideas that they thought would generate listeners.
Today, conservatives are hinting that we may need a Fairness Doctrine for big tech. Raising cries of censorship because Facebook, Google, and Twitter are blocking conservative content, they want to use the antitrust laws to force the companies to quit blocking conservative content. In other words, they want to compel Facebook, Google, and Twitter to allow both sides of an issue to be presented in a manner that is fair and equitable. They want to deny those companies the freedom to use their property as they think best.
Freedom of speech means that one can express the ideas of his choosing without penalty or restrictions from government. It means that one can choose what to say and what not to say. Freedom of speech means that government will not dictate what cannot be said or what must be said.
Freedom of speech does not mean that others must provide one with a microphone, lecture hall, or printing press. To force the owner of a radio station, a lecture hall, or a printing press to present ideas that he opposes violates his freedom of speech, as well as his right to use his property as he chooses.
Violating the right to free speech in the name of promoting free speech is a gross contradiction. That was true in 1949, and it is true today.