Under current rules, on most social media sites, things can be cause for removal without being demonstrably false. What you appear to be suggesting is that onl

Under current rules, on most social media sites, things can be cause for removal without being demonstrably false. What you appear to be suggesting is that only demonstrably false or things like strong language apply. If you suggest that platforms cannot remove other content, a lot of actions from people like reddit to remove objectionable content are banned, similarly here. Content has been removed from HN for example for "not contributing to the discussion", that's a subjective opinion, but one I'd suggest that site owners are entitled to. Also when you start getting into very fine grained distinctions (for example have some of the things president trump has said been "demonstrably false" or not?) the chances of a law accurately capturing that requirement in such a way that a massive number of lawsuits are not started are (in my opinion) low. Opening the door to that kind of lawsuit would seem likely to destroy smaller, less well funded sites, whilst larger players could likely weather the storm.