You may (or may not, I've no interest in expressing an opinion on it) be right in that things could have been worse if the megaphone were not removed. However f

You may (or may not, I've no interest in expressing an opinion on it) be right in that things could have been worse if the megaphone were not removed. However from the original article's viewpoint, if Section 230 weren't there then the situation may not have arisen in the first place as the months/years of build-up commentary, articles, posts, etc would have been regulated as they were published. In other words (to apply the article's logic) if the 'censorship' is applied beforehand by standard journalistic practices (lawyers, editors, etc) then the need for 'censorship' (and deplatforming) afterwards is notably diminished.