I want to respectfully disagree with you. The kernel of your argument here is that the speech in question is a matter of disagreement. It's important to define what kind of speech we're talking about here, because everyone might mean something different.

To be clear, we are talking about verifiably false speech. Verifiably false speech that is sufficiently amplified can have serious consequences. This is unequivocally NOT a matter of differing opinions. And, yes, I understand that there is a huge gray area as to what is "verifiably false", but it's still a standard that we should strive for. Misinformation is a serious problem that is arguably responsible for tens of thousands dying in the US from COVID just in the past few months. This is not a game.

I can't say for sure if you're framing the question as partisan bickering in good faith, but if you are I want you to consider how flat out lies and half truths can have extremely dangerous effects. All sources of misinformation are dangerous, but it is undeniable that one "side" traffics in misinformation in much, much higher volume (at least an order of magnitude). Anyways, the point is the problem is not simple and anyone claiming such is oversimplifying at best and being disingenuous at worst.