Prologue: I do not disagree with this post one bit.

Notably, "free speech" has both a constitutional and colloquial usage.

Constitutionally, your First Amendment right to Free Speech (in the US) is a guard against the state interfering with your speech, even if it is offensive. Still, that's not universal; consider libel and slander, gag orders, for example. The Constitutional free speech protection does not shield you from consequences of your speech handed down by non-governmental persons or organizations.

Colloquially, "free speech" is often used to refer to situations like the one posted here: where a non-state actor takes a retributive action against a speaker. This usage is leveraged by people across the political spectrum.