Dear Editorial Staff.   Does money mean unequal free speech?  We know corporation are now granted 'free speech' rights with very few limits on spending and loose rules allowing anonymity for donors.      

Conversation about public demonstrations are good to have, but the reality of public communication is that it's a multi-media approach.   Violence, extreme persuasion, comes in many forms.  Power gives you access to weapons far more effective than shields and baseball bats.
People do not have to assemble to have a very large audience.

What good does it do to stop the KKK from talking to a thousand people in the town square, when their websites can access millions?   The best reason to support free speech is the inability to stop it.    

The issue has great emotional impact, it's a good sore to lance.   But the real persuaders in our society will not be found holding demonstrations in the park.   Event driven news services are not likely to look.