I understand this line of thinking, but I think it oversimplifies the issue. Some companies have a market cap larger than a small country. Some companies sell weapons to foreign militaries. Tools of different power need different laws governing them. I think the fact we restrict the political speech of federal employees (example: public school teachers) reflects this idea. Are you suggesting the same laws that apply to a pen that Larry Page owns should apply to the Google home page?
We don't restrict the political speech of federal employees except when they are at work. Public school teachers are free to advocate for anything they want and donate their pay to all sorts of causes.
In 2008, teachers were the largest group of political speakers nationwide, and contributed $13 million more to political causes than the largest corporation (the Penn National Gaming company). In general, government employees contribute more money to politics than corporations. In fact, in the list of the top 10 political contributors, there are 2 corporations (both gambling), 2 unions, 4 indian tribes, realtors, and a left wing PAC.
And yes, I do suggest that freedom of speech should apply to all speech, even speech that is heard by millions of people. Similarly, the same laws on vocal speech should apply to me and to Oprah, in spite of the fact that vastly more people will hear and be persuaded by her.
