Money, he said in a follow-up interview on Saturday, was not a prime motivator for him. “Money is the jet fuel for the jet bombers I use to drop truth bombs,” he said.

Mr. Jones is eager to characterize his fight as a stand for constitutionally protected speech, but the private companies that have removed his programming from their platforms have broad latitude to control content, especially if it violates their written terms of service.

Facebook removed Mr. Jones’s pages for violating its policies by “glorifying violence” and “using dehumanizing language to describe people who are transgender, Muslims and immigrants.” YouTube terminated Mr. Jones’s channel for repeatedly violating its policies, including its prohibition on hate speech. Spotify cited its own prohibition on hate speech as the reason for removing a podcast by Mr. Jones.

Indeed, Infowars’ own website says in its terms of service that the company “may review and delete any content you post on the website or elsewhere utilizing our services or system if we determine, in our sole discretion, that the content violates the rights of others, is not appropriate for the website, or otherwise violates this agreement.”

But Vera Eidelman, a fellow with the American Civil Liberties Union’s Speech, Privacy and Technology Project, sided with Mr. Jones.

“While private companies can choose what to take down from their sites, the fact that social media platforms like Facebook have become indispensable platforms for the speech of billions means that they should resist calls to censor offensive speech,” she said in a statement. “The recent decision by Facebook and YouTube to take down Alex Jones’s content may have provided a quick solution to a challenging situation, but encouraging these companies to silence individuals in this way will backfire.”

Mr. Jones was defiant on his program Monday, saying past efforts to screen offensive broadcasts have “only made us stronger.”