If your intent is to prevent harm to a group then why not implement it in such a way that it prevents harm to all groups equally? If you oppose harmful content

If your intent is to prevent harm to a group then why not implement it in such a way that it prevents harm to all groups equally? If you oppose harmful content you shouldn't temper your opposition just because the harm is being done to a group that you perceive as being less vulnerable. That's veering into territory where you are making judgements about who is deserving of being harmed, that's a very different position than harm prevention and is not morally defensible with such broad categories. I think the author is correct in identifying its political bias as a key feature that should inform how we look at this problem.