Here, the facts likely mirror Bernardo since Gaius published his voter commentary on the internet, where anyone with a connection could access the website. It could be argued; however, that Gaius published his voter commentary on his UCSF adjunct professor page because he intended to specifically reach out to his students, like how Nike and LSAC tailored their “speech” to their respective consumers. In rebuttal, Nike directly addressed its audience via letters to the coaches and consumers of their products and LSAC mailed the flagged test scores directly to schools requested by the applicant. Analogous to Bernardo, Gaius posted his voter commentary on his teacher website for anyone to read. The facts do not support whether or not the students in his class were actual or potential customers. He did not specifically instruct students to read the commentary nor did he directly email/mail his commentary to any particular person.
