First off, I would like to point out the hypocrisy in your argument, if you ban a group of people for saying they don't support the right to free speech, then you aren't giving them the right to free speech. Secondly, censorship doesn't violate free speech, their right to free speech entitle them to not show certain parts of things on there programming, as the freedom of free speech protects the right to not say something if you don't want to. Thirdly, not-for-profit, doesn't mean propaganda, as you are implying, and propaganda is technically free speech by the government if that is the case. Finally, I would like a more specific example of this, to see where this could possibly be an issue.
I am not in favor of banning people, I never said that. I said they should not be considered as 501c3 nonprofits. They should pay all the taxes that everyone else does. How can free speech exist if the news agency itself moderates comments and chooses to delete the ones it dislikes, while publishing those it does like? That's free speech for them, but for anyone else, not so much. Call VtDigger, a "not for profit" news agency and ask them what their comment policy is.1- 802-225-6224 is their office phone number. Beware, they are pretty socialist, and will likely erase the comments of anyone with a libertarian streak.
If it is not for profit it should be considered a non profit by the government, that's free speech, censoring is protected by the first amendment in the same way it kind of goes agianst free speech, but the news organizations free speech wins beacuse. They're allowed to not say certain things if they don't want to. Free speech includes socialists, unfortunately.