I don't understand the line you're drawing. Isn't fake news also an unfortunate side-effect of free speech? Aren't education and public reputation existing mech

I don't understand the line you're drawing. Isn't fake news also an unfortunate side-effect of free speech? Aren't education and public reputation existing mechanisms for regulating it? Your argument that fake news is more dangerous makes sense, but it's not hard to argue the other way. Hate speech causes suicides, while fake news only causes temporary misinformation. Hate speech makes people withdraw from society and public life, driving them out of democratic institutions. Fake news usually just lets people hear what they want to hear, confirming beliefs they already had. The "victims" of fake news are actively seeking it out, while the victims of hate speech are being attacked. Maybe that's not completely convincing, but hopefully you see what I mean. We already have lots of controls on free speech, are there any intrinsic reasons you think hate speech and fake news are categorically different?