Free speech threatened by 1,000 cuts in the battle for technology, media and politics

Nearly a century later, we face an even more chaotic battlefield: free speech is threatened not by a single monolithic oppressor, but by a hydra of rapidly changing political agendas, corporate interests, and societal and technological forces, all of which are eroding our ability to freely express our ideas.

Free speech is being destroyed – but not with a sledgehammer in one dramatic action. It is death by a thousand cuts, whether intentional or technological, depending on the whim of an unfocused society.

All of this points to a profound shift in the way information, power and influence are being reshaped – and reshaping the 21st century.

From news to noise

In a stunning move, WCBS-AM – New York City’s legendary news radio station – abandoned objective journalism in favor of a sports format in late August.

This isn't just a brand rebrand. It's a strategic move, fueled by rapid technological advances, declining trust, changing generational habits, intense competition and economic pressures – all of which are redefining culture and consumer behavior.

Talk radio stations with their sharp opinions and expert opinions are enjoying growing popularity and 63 million people tune in every week – paradoxically often under the same umbrella of the corporations that once propagated the news formats.

Meanwhile, Nielsen data from July 2023 show that the share of traditional television news, including broadcast and cable, in total television usage fell below 50% for the first time.

At the same time, streaming services continue to grow in popularity, reaching almost 39% of all television viewers. YouTube and social media are also luring away news audiences from broadcasters, further weakening the influence of traditional news broadcasts.

In addition, podcast adoption has grown 20% annually over the past three years, luring audiences away from traditional television as younger demographics prefer on-demand content.

While these changes allow a wider range of voices to be heard, they also create a blurring of the line between open dialogue and misinformation, making it increasingly difficult to distinguish between genuine discussion and misleading content.

Legal drama

The numerous legal maneuvers may at first glance seem like a courtroom drama, but a closer look reveals sophisticated cartels and government plans aimed at silencing criticism and suppressing free expression.

In August, X, formerly Twitter, filed suit against the World Federation of Advertisers (WFA), the Global Alliance for Responsible Media (GARM), an arm of the WFA, and GARM members CVS Health, Mars, Orsted and Unilever. The suit accuses them of colluding to illegally boycott certain companies and platforms, including Rumble, by abusing brand safety standards to exclude them from advertising. The brands argue that they are free to choose who they want to advertise with.

In a dramatic twist, GARM was shut down just 48 hours after the lawsuit was announced, but the litigation continues.

Later that month, EU Commissioner Thierry Breton warned Elon Musk about X's compliance with the European Union (EU) Digital Services Act and raised concerns about harmful content in an interview with former US President Donald Trump.

This political overreach is an example of the EU's bureaucratic attempts to control freedom of expression on digital platforms. Breton's attempt failed miserably – and the interview was seen by almost a billion people.

In a serious attack on free speech, Brazilian Supreme Court judge Alexandre de Moraes ordered Musk owner X to pay fines for failing to remove posts that contradicted government statements, and banned Brazilians from posting on the platform, imposing heavy penalties for non-compliance.

Moraes' measures are extreme and unnecessary censorship disguised as a fight against disinformation. The backlash sparked mass protests in Sao Paolo, where thousands gathered on social media platforms last weekend to defend their rights.

In May 2023, the U.S. Supreme Court (SCOTUS) ruled that government officials cannot force private companies to suppress unwelcome views. This decision reaffirms important protections against government interference in free speech.

Regardless, the Supreme Court set new limits in its unanimous decision in National Rifle Association v. Vullostressing that government officials cannot compel private companies to censor views they dislike and reaffirming the principle that freedom of expression must be protected from undue influence.

Under pressure from U.S. government officials during the COVID-19 pandemic, Meta censored content, which CEO Mark Zuckerberg later regretted and further exposed the questionable dynamic between technology companies and government interference in speech.

Meanwhile, Google is under investigation by the EU for antitrust violations and is being scrutinized for misinformation, privacy violations and poor data security, highlighting broader concerns about the influence of big tech companies on public discourse.

And the list goes on.

Censorship will not give us a

“We must remember that every oppression, every injustice, every hatred is a wedge designed to attack our free society,” former US President Dwight D. Eisenhower wisely said.

In the United States, free speech is more than a constitutional right. It is powerful and affects daily life. It allows people to provide reviews, which encourages companies to perform better. It allows employees to speak up about working conditions, which leads to safer and fairer workplaces. It allows entrepreneurs to openly present their ideas, stimulating competition and driving economic growth.

When we lose open dialogue, we lose more than just words – we lose the ability to call out unfair practices and push for change.

Media sensationalism traps us in echo chambers, drowns out dissent and stifles debate. Government and corporate control of information distorts our decisions and influences everything from our purchases to our votes.

Protecting free speech isn't just about grand ideals – it's about ensuring that every person has the opportunity to challenge the status quo, demand improvement, and shape their own future.

Without free speech, people lose the ability to influence their lives, their communities, and the future of the country. By upholding free speech and defending freedom, we empower everyone to make meaningful change in the world.

The fight for free speech is a daily struggle for each of us. If we don't quickly see the connections, we could soon lose the diversity of voices that drives progress, innovation and responsibility.

In short, it is freedom of expression, among many other reasons, that allows me to write this article.

Other indispensable comments published by Assets:

The opinions expressed in Fortune.com’s commentaries reflect solely the views of their authors and do not necessarily reflect the opinions and beliefs of Assets.