[harpersealtako]

One specific example might be recent panics over "misinformation" (e.g. covid misinformation), what I would call the idea that incorrect, contrarian, or offensive speech online isn't just bad, but fundamentally dangerous. Even if you believe this is true, there is absolutely a powerful moral panic movement that exaggerates the terribleness of misinformation, and generally places itself in opposition to free speech in its solutions that call for more and broader censorship of online platforms.

Of course this perspective relies on a few base assumptions, such as: 1) free speech exists as an ideal aside from legal protections, 2) corporate censorship is a threat to this ideal, and 3) misinformation isn't as bad as the alarmists claim it is. If you don't agree with those points, it might not appear as a moral panic to you, which may explain some of the confusion.