Somewhat reducing CP is good, even if you don't eliminate it completely.
> the filters are not effective
Using your chosen example, there is very little CP on Facebook, Instagram, YouTube, Twitter and Amazon. That's prima facie evidence that filters can be effective, even if they're less than 100% effective.
> why can't the government solve all the problems with more regulation
I'm starting to see the theme of your argument now. If X achieves less than 100% perfection, then we should eliminate X, whether X is content filtering or government regulation.
Some drivers fail to stop at red lights and stop signs, causing accidents and injuries. But few people would agree to eliminate red lights and stop signs. Even though they're flawed, they are better than nothing at busy intersections.
Somewhat reducing CP is good, even if you don't eliminate it completely.
> the filters are not effective
Using your chosen example, there is very little CP on Facebook, Instagram, YouTube, Twitter and Amazon. That's prima facie evidence that filters can be effective, even if they're less than 100% effective.
> why can't the government solve all the problems with more regulation
I'm starting to see the theme of your argument now. If X achieves less than 100% perfection, then we should eliminate X, whether X is content filtering or government regulation.
Some drivers fail to stop at red lights and stop signs, causing accidents and injuries. But few people would agree to eliminate red lights and stop signs. Even though they're flawed, they are better than nothing at busy intersections.