I'm okay with 230 being yeeted, but the application of the law is the opposite of how you would philosophically pass a law, and as such, requires massively re-writing other laws.

230 carves out legal protections to online publications for them not to be sued for edgy commentary appearing on their site. You should not have a carve out for legal protections at all. You shouldn't need those legal protections. Those 'legal protections' exist because the state justified heavy handed lawsuits against publishers of any kind if some commentary appeared, meaning that older media existed because smaller companies in previous eras wouldn't survive the lawsuits.

That is the problem. A publisher or a platform should not be able to be sued into collapse simply because someone gave their opinion. 230 shouldn't exist as an exception because the underlying laws allowing for massive lawsuits against platforms and publishers shouldn't exist. Removing those, removes the need for an exception to them.

Additionally, we should pull out all of our government subsidies, research grants, tax breaks, etc to these organizations anyway.

Now, can we do that? ... no. There's no political will, and little legal understanding.