No sir, no confusion here. You and I both said the same thing. Freedom of speech / free speech are the same thing in the US, a very specific legal construct under the first amendment, which many people don’t understand the boundaries of. I have a degree in this field, so I’m pretty up to speed on basic civil rights. Hence why I questioned the other user on why they think costco boycotting callaway because of a gross chud ad had anything to do with a law that deals with government overreach.

Now if the ad depicted the dude tackling Trump to the ground and threatening him for touching their underage caddy, and the FBI raided their offices in response, NOW we’d be talking about a first amendment issue as that’d be direct political commentary and an illegal response by the government.

Boycotting a private company has nothing to do with free speech. I’m also not sure what a “culture of free speech” is. Free speech in the US is a specific set of constitutional laws. If you’re talking about philosophical “free” speech, that’s an entirely different topic and not legally bound or functional, so pretty irrelevant to this topic.

I never asked you or anyone else anything about this ad or what is being done about it, what are you talking about? At this point I’m assuming I’m likely arguing with an LLM from all of the bizarre irrelevant points and hallucations being made.

This post is about Costco boycotting the company who commissioned and approved the ad to represent them and their products. How would you propose costco boycotts a TV network that they have no direct ties to? You do understand costco is a retail chain that sells physical products, in physical stores. They don’t operate the TV networks or manage internet personalities and their sponsors. Short of putting out broad statements claiming NBC or Fox or whoever support domestic violence (which would open them up to slander and libel lawsuits that they’d very likely lose), I don’t know what else you’re demanding they do. They stopped doing business with Callaway by no longer promoting or offering their products.

Again, none of this has anything to do with your right to address or protest the US government. I’m starting to think you might not have ever actually read the bill of rights.

The FCC being useless and bought off still doesn’t mean that Callaway gets special first amendment protections. They’re a corporation, they aren’t protected from consumers and retailers dropping their products for promoting crimes, or from potential lawsuits as a result of harmful marketing.

Again, this topic has nothing to do with free speech.

That’s not what free speech is. Free speech doesn’t let you say whatever you want to anyone, it’s intention is to protect you while speaking out against government officials and offices. Last I checked Callaway wasn’t the 4th branch of the government, let’s not give turkey neck any ideas.

The FCC should be regulating ads like this, but this is a clown country and capitalism says domestic violence is a viable commodity to sell.

Imagine being an Admiral Patrick alt and being upset about an invasive app forcing itself onto your device and user experience without permission