I see the big issue here as whether people want free speech or not. Technology continues to greatly amplify what a single person can accomplish. A person can give their opinion, offer advice, relay misinterpreted or misunderstood information, or even outright lie. The point is that free speech is just that -- free and without constraint.

If there are going to be limits to free speech, then who gets to set those limits and who enforces the limits? Whoever gets to set those limits and enforce them assumes control over public discussion. I think the point of free speech usually has been to protect the people from unbridled power. Unfortunately, excessive free speech makes the signal-to-noise ratio intolerably low, and free speech itself becomes a weapon used against free speech.

Adjudicating free speech is a very hard problem when everyone has the ability to communicate with everyone else. It is not clear that Facebook, even if it were to prioritize ethics over economics, can address the issue in a manner satisfactory to all (or even most) stakeholders.