Classic reaction image, although I often see it wrongly used… and I know I may get shit for saying this, but that is probably because the image itself is partially guilty of the crime it points out. It assumes the receiver is an "asshole" while being extremely condescending and passive-aggressive about it, pretty much treating the receiver like a spoiled child who only understands things by being yelled at. Not many people are actually like that compared to those who are not, yet this image flies by AS SOON as anyone mentions free speech for any reason.

I would rather just point out why free speech is not a factor to consider in a given context and spare the usage of this image. Maybe this is my opinion, but just because someone is being an asshole, it does not mean me being an asshole is immediately right or acceptable. Two wrongs do not make one right, and being "right" about something does not give you a free pass to act in any way you wish towards the "wrong" people. Except maybe if the other person is REAAAAAAAAALLY being a mega asshole, and again, that is often not the case compared to when it is, and even when it is the case, more often than anything, it is not even worth bothering yourself with. Pick your fights, people. Not everyone is worth arguing with.

Just saying.

I'm probably gonna get shit for this, but personally, I think that this comic is wrong by assuming that people are referring to their 1st amendment right to freedom of speech and not the concept of freedom of speech.

If a private organization does something to censor views it isn't defying the right to freedom of speech, but it is still defying the concept of freedom of speech.

It's sorta like how companies like don't defy your 4th amendment right to privacy by taking your information and selling it, but they do defy the concept of privacy by doing it.

TL;DR It's a question of ethics, not legality