having worked for a large internet company, I have to say the challenges of dealing with content like this is much more complicated than the NY Times appreciates.
Edit: Thanks all. I'll know better than to kick the troll hive next time.
Leave it to the network to naturally filter out content they don't want.
If I say that 4 million died in the Holocaust rather than 6 million, is that Holocaust denial?
Edit: funny that people are downvoting me because they think I'm speaking against free speech, thus silencing my opinion.
You could say the Beatles caused Sharon Tate to get murdered.
Trust me, deciding what is hate speech is is impossible. And lots of people try to advance their agenda accusing others, trying to silence them. I have seen it a lot of times.
Regarding fake news, Facebook tried to suppress them. But they don't know how politics in my country work, so they leaned on another institution. The other institution is managed by the wife of a politician. I think you can guess the rest.
Silencing one thing can be simple.
But once you take of role of censorship, people will ask you to censor other stuff and give reason for censoring/not-censoring that. It will quickly grow into an unmanagable mess.