It’s also not objective. Who decides which forms of expression are inappropriate? I might think something is shit, while you think it’s brilliant. It might be an unpopular view, and unpopular views aren’t always wrong. That’s why you need to be consistent if you’re claiming censorship is wrong.
It would be like seeing David Suzuki dump a barrel of waste into a nearby river. It’s not that what he did will have a negative impact on the scale of most newsworthy events. It’s that he’s respected as an environmentalist, so one would think he’d practice what he preaches.