Earlier quoted context omitted.
Even more, Apple has assigned itself powers that in most (sane) countries are a strict monopoly of governments (and preferably only after going through a legal system/process and strictly regulated). Especially Apple's attempt/request/demand to remove things silently goes way beyond what any company (or citizen) should ever be allowed to do to speech of others. Whether this doxxing is justified or not, that's up to c…
By telling Apple they can’t control others’ speech on their platform, you are in effect controlling Apple’s speech, forcing them to host or be associated with material they don’t want.
Since when is control, or censorship, of what someone else says speech in it's own right? If Apple wanted a disclaimer next to a message, or something along those lines, you might still remotely have somewhat of a point.
Following your contrived line of "reasoning", any TV producer should have a right to decide what viewers can (and can not) watch on their hardware.
Last time I checked, companies that make product for a consumer market explicitly do NOT have a right to decide what consumers can do with it.
Somehow, software producers already got way more leeway with that than the probably ever should have in the first place (in accordance with the law). But to argue that they should because it's about the free speech of companies, is absolutely bunkers.
I'm aware that the USA made the rather mind boggling decision that companies are people to them (though arguably only so politics could be even more corrupted with corporate money), giving rise to the lunacy of a company having something as free speech. But even accepting that as a (dismal) fact of reality (in the USA), controlling the speech of others just isn't speech itself. More importantly, such control is explicitly forbidden by law (even as per the UDHR).