So, this is being done for the safety of children? Perhaps another approach would be to require these big tech companies to devote a portion of their earnings to financing a government agency to oversee the internet and concentrate specifically on the "dark web" or "deep web" or whatever they call it. I'm all for protecting children from the internet creeps, the sex traffickers, and the kiddie porn merchants, but I have a strong feeling that's not even a priority for them. Their higher priority seems to be a desire to control the flow of information - but I doubt they're going to have much luck in doing that.
The internet is historically analogous to the invention of the printing press. Before the printing press, books and other written materials were quite rare. But once the printing press was invented, more books came about, and the exchange of knowledge (which the Powers That Be obviously wanted to prevent) spread across the world. This was certainly one of many factors which led to greater freedom and more democratic societies - because governments (and religions) were finding it much more difficult to control the flow of knowledge as they once did.
There have also been governments which have attempted to censor printed materials (as well as radio, TV, movies, and music recording), but it doesn't really seem to work in the long run. People will still find ways around it. Or they may openly challenge it and take the consequences. Maybe make themselves a martyr and rile up the public to rise up against tyranny and form a government which values freedom. I think that's even happened before.
I think freedom of the press and freedom of speech have been beneficial to the West in that it promoted the open exchange of ideas and the flow of knowledge throughout multiple societies. We were able to share innovations, ideas, discoveries, and inventions and build on each other's knowledge.
Of course, most of us know that freedom of speech isn't an absolute right. You can't incite a riot or otherwise cause a clear and present danger. But apart from obvious things like that, it's pretty wide open.
As for the internet and the possibility of government censorship, I think it may prove to be far more difficult than it's worth in the long run. It seems that the problem is more with the technology than with the content. After all, people have been saying (and some even printing) some really crazy things for as long as I've been alive.
But if they post it on the internet, suddenly it's a problem - because it's on the internet. That would indicate the main problem is with the technology. They can't control it anymore. Even if they can tame the tech giants into submission, I'm not sure if it will really change anything in the long run. We'll still get fake news and trolls and all that stuff.
