[ineedasername]

You're looking at this through a lens of "fairness". It doesn't have to be fair. Google doesn't have to decide to either let no lies through, or let all lies through.

It's their platform, their property, they are allowed to do with it as they will. Just like a newspaper doesn't have to print every letter sent in by a reader, or every ad someone wants printed. (This later example is something I have experience with: I was the editor of a college newspaper targeted by a white-supremacist holocaust-denying group that wanted me to print their anti-Semitic ads. I didn't print them)

No one is entitled to the amplification of their views that these platforms make possible. They may be platforms that are publicly accessible, but they are privately owned & operated, and I think it would be a serious blow to the concept of private property to essentially impose forced speech on them.

There are plenty of other platforms that will let someone run anything they want through them. Sure, they're not as big and don't have the audience that Google does, but again: no one is entitled to that Freedom of speech doesn't require anyone to force others to repeat that speech.