Below are discussion questions for readers, book clubs, and classrooms engaging with Transaction Denied: Big Finance’s Power to Punish Speech.
Transaction Denied explores how financial systems quietly shape who gets to participate online—and what happens when access is cut off. My hope is that these questions encourage thoughtful conversation about power, accountability, and the future of free expression in a networked world. You can order your copy now and be part of the conversation as the book launches.
Discussion questions
The book opens with Reitman’s personal experience when the nonprofit campaign she helped lead, the Chelsea Manning Support Network, had its PayPal account frozen. How did that moment set the tone for the rest of the book?
How does Reitman describe the relationship between governments controlling speech and private corporations controlling access? Do you see corporate censorship as more or less concerning than state censorship?
What role does financial infrastructure (like payment processors and banks) play in modern free speech? Did this book change how you think about money as a gatekeeper to expression?
The author discusses “terms of service” as powerful but often invisible tools of control. How do these agreements shape online behavior, and do you think we give meaningful consent to these complex terms when we use online and financial services?
How does the concept of infrastructure-level censorship differ from traditional content moderation?
Reitman blends memoir with policy analysis. How did the personal narrative affect your understanding of the legal and technical issues?
What ethical responsibilities do companies like PayPal, Visa, or Chase have when faced with controversial but law abiding clients?
The book touches on activism and digital rights organizations. How effective do you think these groups are in pushing back against corporate overreach?
How does fear—of legal liability, public backlash, or reputational damage—drive corporate decision-making in the examples Reitman provides?
Were there moments in the book where your opinion shifted about a specific platform, organization, or incident? What caused that shift?
How does the book’s argument relate to current public debates?
Reitman posits that those who have less power in society are more likely to face the consequences of losing access to financial services as a result of their speech. Did you find her arguments compelling?
Of the groups struggling with financial censorship in the book, which did you personally find most sympathetic? Which did you find least sympathetic?
After reading Transaction Denied, what actions (if any) do you feel policymakers should take to protect financial access and neutrality?