Are you trying to make the point that the backlash he is receiving is also freedom of speech?
No. I'm saying that freedom means lack of consequences. All speech has consequences.
LD, I have no idea what you're saying or where you're going with it.
I am trying to argue that the larger your audience, the less freedom you have when you speak. At a national level, you have very little if any at all as the consequences are not only immediate but usually grand.
Nothing you have cited prevents A & E from ceasing business activities with a party they deem to be damaging to their brand.
I never said it didn't.
As far as I'm concerned, he screwed himself over.
Here, let me try to simplify what I'm saying:
Every word you speak to someone has consequences. Sometimes those consequences are so little, they're virtually irrelevant. Other times, not so much.
Also, as the number of people who see/hear/read those words increases, so do the consequences. If he were to speak to his family only on the subject, it's likely nothing bad would happen to him. If he were to speak to his church, he may have some murmers but nothing life style changing. Town hall meeting: Maybe a petition. State level: maybe some protests. National level: Well.. you get the idea.
He did not have the freedom to speak his mind to that reporter anymore than I have the freedom to tell his boss off (assuming he needs the job).
In fact, that may be simpler to say:
Why do we not speak our minds to our superiors if we dislike them?
Because we don't want to deal with the consequences. We are restricted from speaking our opinion. From expressing our feelings.