Explain how Citizens United vs FEC [1] represents "democracy working as intended". Yes, everyone can vote, but anyone can spend arbitrary amounts of money to prop up any candidate they like, or suppress any candidate they dislike. Thus, money translates pretty directly to advertising/information control, which in turn translates to power. Democracy has been broken for almost a decade now, and the only way it could be fixed is by a super-majority, so even a small minority interest (either out of self interest or manipulation) can enforce the status quo.

America is an oligarchy controlled by the wealthy, and those who desire to change it cannot hope to speak loud enough to be heard over the full torrent of "free speech" from financial interests.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Citizens_United_v._FEC

Requiring a super-majority might work...until big money finds a way to buy itself a super-majority.

The problem with suppressing speech in general is 'who decides?'

Yes corporations currently have a lot of power and it is difficult for the average person to filter. However the alternative is effectively censorship.

It's easy to say 'ban the fake news', 'ban the corporate money', but who decides what qualifies as fake news, or which companies / groups / associations / qualify as corporations? Whoever decides gains a huge amount of power.

There has got to be a better solution than censorship.