But I dislike the idea that private individuals and, by legal adjunct, corporations are somehow unable to deny people freedom of speech because, y'know, our freedom of speech only applies to the government restricting it.
(Which is also, by the way, not true, and has never been true in the US. Even before the Constitution was written, US states were forcing newspapers to give space to the political opponents of the owners and editors. They knew that a newspaper owner could control public discourse unless they were compelled to give equal time to their opposition! The idea that newspapers, in part, were engaged in a public service has always been part of our country and the reasoning that was used, then, is easily transferred to discourse about Internet privacy issues.)