Chou wants to protect "ABSOLUTE free speech" so I was operating with that in mind.I can't speak for Chou but in my opinion the issue is intent. It's certainly within google's right to fire the man for writing the memo. The question is, should they?
It's within chick-fil-a's rights to fund anti-gay advertisements and lobbies. Should they?
It's within reddit and facebook's rights to filter right-wing news from users. Should they?
It's within students to protest against their professor and call him a racist. Should they? I see the original article as an example of misguided anger. The professor is just as left-leaning as the protesters, but they were quick to label him as the enemy. Is that healthy for free speech in America? Say one thing that a group of people disagree with and you're instantly the bad guy?
And at any rate, how does "ABSOLUTE free speech" work with an employee/employer? Does the employee's ABSOLUTE free speech trump the employer's ABSOLUTE free speech? Should the employee not be fired if his/her ABSOLUTE free speech endangers the employer's bottom line?
What is ABSOLUTE free speech?
Edit: for example,
Employee Dudebro criticizes his Employer's policy on diversity. Fellow employees no longer want to work with him. Employer cans him for "promoting gender stereotypes" (at an inconvenient time considering the US Gov was already accusing Google for discriminatory hiring practices towards women) (basically they don't want the bad press). Whose ABSOLUTE free speech should win?
Platinum Blonde Firebrand hosts conservative blabbermouth show (I forget the name) where she calls everyone a snowflake for not liking being beat up for being gay or something idk. She goes onto rival snowflake all-women blabbermouth show and comes out in favor of a woman's right to choose (to have an abortion). Her employer (popular ultrameme conservative conspiracy theorist) fires her for her beliefs, which undermine the conservative ideals of his company. Whose ABSOLUTE free speech should win?