I don't think that's right. If true, is the parade not expressive if the organizers try to exclude certain messages but fail, resulting in an unintended viewpoint being disseminated? The fact that they are trying to eliminate the output in the first place means the result is inherently expressive.

No, the fact that they're attempting to eliminate the output means they have no 1A interest in keeping the output

I don't think "protection depends on what the ideas are" is going to be a winning argument. Besides this is all undercut by the desire to impose liability because they advertise a "truth machine." "providing useful answers to your prompts" is expressive intent even if an answer isn't useful.

It doesn't matter omif the answer is ultimately useful or not. The desire that it be is enough.

Put another way: failure to communicate the message has not been sufficient to strip expression of protection