There are no absolutes, everything needs to be taken in its proper socio-political context. Freedom of speech was basically a European product - a reaction of ascending urban classes against the straitjacket of the pulpit and its official dogmas. It was conducive toward democracy in the era when speech was carried by small and independent media and every voice had a more or less equal chance of being heard.
Those conditions do not exist anymore. Virtually all voices are jammed and deluged by the megawatts of noise generated by the corporate media and entertainment industry. The corporate media, in turn, are today what the pulpit was in 16-17th century Europe - the crutch for the powers that be and the bludgeon to silence dissent. F-o-s today means one or more of the following things:
1. freedom to produce and disseminate cultural commodity without even most rudimentary social responsibility (e.g. one imposed on the manufacturers of other products, such as food, automobiles, or housing that must follow quality standards);
2. freedom to pollute the public sphere with noise that drowns all voices and renders any intelligent discourse meaningless
3. freedom to spew propaganda conducive to the interest of the ruling class without any meaningful possibility of being contradicted.
In short, the media and entertainment are the most irresponsible and polluting of all industries, but unlike other industries they enjoy remarkably free hand under the f-o-s doctrine. In this context, f-o-s not only does not add to democracy, but effectively poisons and kills it.
wojtek