That is frankly an entirely wrongheaded approach to speech, in seeing the reach of speech and ability as a problem. When the entire point of speech is to reach people and influence them. That is exactly what speech is supposed to do. It isn't a good thing to 'moderate' the reach of speech. It is supposed to allow organization of mass groups. Trying to divide it into good and bad speech makes even less sense than trying to define good and bad gravity.

Control of speech is the One Ring, that governments are always tempted towards, always rationalizing it as the solution to all of their problems, and under no circumstances should be allowed to possess. Of course it is bad in an authoritarian regime! Messy and complicated does not override the overwhelming evidence, it does not in fact remain to be seen.