Knowing that I purchased my phone and that I pay a monthly fee for service, I was quite surprised to find the Deseret Morning News editorializing in favor of telemarketing. Property that is purchased and maintained by a private party should not be a free speech platform for someone else.
The editorial says, "Not all speech is welcome, but society as a whole loses something when any form of speech is prohibited." So, to be logically consistent, the Deseret Morning News must also be in favor of spam, telemarketing cell phones and telemarketing with faxes. So what if it costs the owners money; doesn't free speech trump private property?