Freedom of Speech Doesn’t Mean I Have to Sponsor It

Recently, I made the difficult decision to part ways with an employee at one of our newspapers. This individual held political and religious views very different from my own—views I respected her right to hold, and which I tolerated for more than a year and a half. But when she chose to publish an article that directly attacked the Christian faith and the authority of the Bible, I had to draw the line. As a Christian and the person ultimately responsible for what we publish, I could not continue sponsoring content that violated my conscience.
Even then, the separation was handled professionally and generously. She was offered a severance package that ensured she wouldn’t be left in financial hardship. I did not act out of malice or spite—but out of conviction.
Some have claimed that this was a violation of her freedom of speech or freedom of the press. That’s a misunderstanding of those freedoms.
Freedom of speech means you can speak your mind without government censorship or punishment. It doesn’t mean you have the right to use someone else’s platform or resources—especially if you’re being paid by them to represent their publication. Freedom of the press means you’re free to start your own newspaper and say what you like. It doesn’t mean you’re entitled to use mine, especially to attack the very beliefs that form the foundation of my life and business.
Let me put it another way. Imagine a Muslim family owns a home, and I—a Christian—go place a large sign in their yard promoting Christianity. If they take it down, have they violated my freedom of speech? Of course not. I still have the freedom to say what I want, but I don’t have the right to use their property to do it.
The same principle applies to our publications and, increasingly, to our digital spaces—our website, our Facebook pages, and other social media profiles. While the platforms themselves are owned by companies like Meta or X, the pages we manage and the audiences we’ve built belong to us. Within the rules of those platforms, we have the right—and the responsibility—to moderate them. That means we may choose to remove comments, hide posts, or even ban users whose messages contradict the values we stand for or who use our pages to stir up division.
That’s not censorship. That’s stewardship.
We are not the government. We are not compelled to give equal time to every message or sponsor speech that offends our readers or our faith. If someone wants to share controversial or contrarian views, they’re free to do so—on their own platform, at their own expense. But if I’m the one signing the check, I get a say in what’s printed, posted, or published in my name.
That’s not suppression. That’s ownership.
Freedom of speech is alive and well in this country. But so is freedom of the press—and freedom of conscience. And no one’s freedom includes the right to force someone else to pay for their message.