> Both the UN and the EU consider privacy a fundamental human right
Privacy and free speech exist in natural conflict. Between the two, I prefer our society which enshrines the latter over the former to the European model which does the reverse.
> The two do not exist in any sort of conflict whatsoever
The "right to be forgotten” debate [1] neatly encapsulates this conflict. Journalists' rights to pry versus citizens' rights to avoid being pried on is another example [2].
This is a balancing act. Excessive privacy restricts what third parties can talk about. Unrestricted speech means anyone can say everything they know (or know to be false) about others' private lives. There are multiple equilibria. But acknowledging the trade-off is a pre-requisite to writing good law.
You're begging the question in both your definition of free speech and assuming a certain bundle of privacy rights.
There's plenty to debate on what speech freedoms people should have and what privacy rights people should have, but it's silly to claim that there's no conflict between them conceptually; if you're stating that there's no conflict, you're assuming a certain set of each, which is just you defining the problem a certain way so that you can say it is solved. If other people don't agree with your definition of the problem, then your solution doesn't hold for them.
I'm drawing a distinction between free speech (specifically parrhesia, which is orthogonal to privacy) and freedom to learn anything about anyone (which is antithetical to privacy). In journalism they are combined, usually to good effect; in doxxing the combination is bad.
Freedom of Speech is not literally being able to say anything. Few people would agree that doxxing or harassment would fall under Freedom of Speech, for instance.
The President is a public person, who's finances are relevant to the running of the country. Your finances, however, are relevant to no one but yourself and your family.
Privacy and free speech exist in natural conflict. Between the two, I prefer our society which enshrines the latter over the former to the European model which does the reverse.