Answer: When a listener cannot, as a practical matter, escape from
intrusive speech, the speech can be restricted. It recognizes that a listener has a right not to be exposed to an unwanted message in circumstances in which the communication cannot be avoided. A regulation based on the captive-audience doctrine is in the guise of censorship, which undertakes selectively to shield the public from some kinds of speech on the ground that they are more offensive than others. Such selective restrictions have been upheld only when the speaker intrudes on the privacy of the home or the degree of captivity makes it either impossible or impractical for the unwilling viewer or auditor to avoid exposure. Thus, a government regulation based on the captive-audience doctrine may not be justified if the supposed “captive audience” may avoid exposure to the otherwise intrusive speech (1-United Transport Koalisyon v. COMELEC, G.R. No. 206020, April 14, 2015).