I'm a bit tired of the argument that everything must be subjected to critique, thus even baseless claims should be allowed. This is akin to inviting quack to TV

I'm a bit tired of the argument that everything must be subjected to critique, thus even baseless claims should be allowed. This is akin to inviting quack to TV to counterpoint actual professionals, or to publish unfounded rebuttals to established science in proper scientific journals. Have not learnt yet, that debating with certain people is not only pointless, but counterproductive? Many people would rather believe to professional polemists and politics dilettantes, than engage in a honest conversation. And YouTube would happily undermine democracy for the extra $100M they will get by allowing these quacks back in their platform. It is not about freedom of speech, but money.