There's a lot there, and I always get a little nervous when something from years ago is.... I don't exactly know what it was.
That being said, the principle still stands that countries have differing national speech laws and that these make a global governance regime for content regulation nearly impossible—and something we should not be aspiring to.
This is the case, frankly, with the outputs of AI-derived speech. What is common across countries, though, is the design of the systems on which they are disseminating and creating speech. I think some common, or at least regulatory, alignment is possible among jurisdictions, and it is probably needed in the face of the behaviour of the American government, which is trying to undermine these efforts globally. Countries are going to need to come into regulatory alignment with one another, at least, on the mechanisms they're regulating.
Both the mechanisms and the objects of those regulations are going to be social media companies, as we previously discussed regarding the online harms act. Other jurisdictions have already built regulatory regimes for this and, increasingly, for consumer-facing AI products, which are themselves platforms through which content is produced and disseminated.