The ultimate problem is that the actions of the boycotters has a cooling effect on speech. Instead of both sides presenting their ideas, one side is doing everything in their power to silence an opposing view.
With respect to money/speech. The problem isn't the money necessary to buy "speech," but that the political checks and balances intended to prevent any politician from having sufficient power that anyone would actually want to pay for that power, have been eroded.
When speech IS the product, and there is something disturbing about that product,
it is perfectly reasonable to engage in a speech act to inform others what they
are supporting by paying for that (and associated) products.
Unless every voice is given an absolutely equal playing field (which is impossible),
it seems as reasonable to allow the will of consumers to determine what speech is
allowed as it is to allow the will of the moneyed interests who control the media. It
is the populist way of achieving any level of equity.
