This seems like a “throw the baby out with the bath water” situation in both directions: Censorship, like you note, can be used for evil to suppress anything you disagree with and drive your narrative. But unbridled amplified speech opens the possibility for destructive mass influence of minds, to be evil and destroy the good things those minds agree on.

So to me this is at least nuanced. Insisting on completely unchecked speech, however unscientific and destructive, is not a reasonable position.