I get what you're saying, but I think that blocking certain words can allow one to make sure they don't get side tracked by common click bait articles. This blog post gives an example with ISIS, which used to be constantly in US headlines a few years ago, yet it never affected the vast majority of Americans. Instead, it made viewers anxious and spend an extensive amount of time reading and discussing a topic that really didn't have an affect on them. That time could have been placed else where in their lives, such as learning a new skill or developing personal relationships: things that would actually affect their lives, and in a positive way.

A common argument against muting words that I see is that it is forceful ignorance, but one must be aware of a concept before deciding to mute that word. That means that no matter what, before someone goes blocking something like "ISIS", the would have had to read about it and noticed that their media feeds have become a click bait ring of nonsense around it instead of actual information.

Also, even if you don't use social media, if there is something that is actually important and requiring your attention (such as the current police brutality focus in America), it will make its way into your life. I don't read the news or use social media, but I knew about COVID when it was coming because it was such a large issue that it couldn't be avoided unintentionally.

The way I handle stuff like the ISIS example is to stop following the fear mongering sources and to simply scroll by those headlines. Words banning is lot's of work when you don't have a centralised place to manage them and might lead me to misuse it.