Yes, and this illustrates another problem: if we agreed on what to ban, it would make more sense to use discretionary human judgment than rules which might be manipulated or Munchkin-ed. We don't agree.

I do think it would make sense in the abstract to ban speech if we had scientific reason to think it harmed people, the way we had reason to think leaded gasoline harmed people in the 1920s. But I only know one class of speech where that might apply, and it'll never get on TV anyway. ^_^