How do you define sowing discord or dividing society? If you look at most of the social advances hard won over the last twenty years, they have always caused discord and challanged society. In America, the right to bear arms has caused massive discord, same with same sex marrage, leagal marijuana, black lives matter... not to mention discussions about political leaders. In other countries similar discord is sown regarding Brexit in the UK, Aslyim seekers in Australia, Climate change. Each of these debates have been accompanied on both sides by a range of discussions with debatable facts.

At what point does the carrier of the message become the legitimate editior or even worse censor of that information. Who decides what is a fact? The winner? The CEO?

As far as I'm aware there is only one disicipline that is considered to have proof of facts, the rest is either best guess that meets the evidence or simply opnion. Allowing the messenger to chose what is and is not a fact removes the massive benefit provided by the internet, the ability for everybody to have a voice.

I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.

We have just celebrated the anaversery of the end of the First World War, lets not have this date be celebrated in the future as being the start of the loss of freedoms that millions died for.