Free Speech and Twitter
It appears that rather than “extract the good from free speech” you would prefer to extract the good from censorship. I say this because only through censorship can you eliminate the kinds of speech you do not like, and enforce the ones you do. This is far more terrifying than having to read some false or silly opinion, in my mind. You could apply those journalistic standards towards your own speech, like anyone else, and we would all be the better for witnessing “the clearer perception and livelier impression of truth, produced by its collision with error”, as per Mill; but now we are on the path to denying even that.
I like what Karl Jaspers said of censorship. He knew a little about it, having lived under a Nazi publication ban. “Censorship doesn’t make anything better. Both censorship and freedom will be abused. The question is simply: which abuse is preferable? Where’s the greater prospect? Censorship leads to both the suppression of truth and its distortion, while freedom only leads to its distortion. Suppression is absolute, but distortion can be straightened out by freedom itself.”
Suppression is absolute, and in that sense the advocate of censorship is an absolutist. Even if we were to legislate truth and enforce truth-telling, we risk placing considerable power of the censor in undeserving hands, “whose objective isn't to seek higher truths and dispense with ignorance, but is for their own personal gain and self-promotion”. We’ve seen this recently with the growing number of state laws criminalizing fake news and “misinformation”, which have invariably been used to stifle dissent and criticism, such as in Egypt and China. With such rules we create an Official Truth, which is far more dangerous to inquiry and higher-truths. At least with free speech we have a chance to compete with such power on an even playing field.