The argument of free speech absolutists who oppose any attempts to censor content is frequently stated as “The best response to bad speech is more speech”. But an even more serious problem with “The best response to bad speech is more speech” mantra is that while it may be a plausible argument in the world of ideas or political arguments, for some speech, there is really no better speech available. What possible forms can the ‘more speech’ or ‘better speech’ take that can combat such things? People like Musk and Zuckerberg can simply ignore the vile things that they have enabled that enrich them while indulging in high-minded rhetoric about upholding free speech. The slippery slope argument can be invoked to say that opponents of free speech almost always start with speech that is manifestly offensive in order to breach the free speech walls so that governments can then attempt to suppress political speech that threatens the government and the powerful.