There is not tangled or corrupted about it.

You are a statist. That's fine, you are entitled to your beliefs. But don't call yourself anything but. You want the government to silence people you don't like. In your case it is incredibly disgusting as you apparently want to silence pharma and use the government to put the media out of business.

I believe it's disgusting, tyrannical, and you are no better than progressives who want to ban hate speech.

On your silly example, how do you define 'pedo'? What does that even mean for ad space? A dating app? A lewd commercial? Soliciting sex? Someone buying an ad saying they want to have sex with a 10 year old?

This would likely be covered as obscene material as define by the supreme Court in multiple cases now, vs free speech rights and possibly a crime in the state. States may very make such rules, as granted in the 10th amendment. Limits? Sure, but very lenient.

What about a 16 year old? That's legal consent in the majority of the states. In my state it's 18.

Hence why your example doesn't work at the federal level, and they have no such authority anyways.

Plus, no reasonable media company big or small would take such an ad and become party to a potential crime. Certainly not a mainstream one.