The question clearly does not ask questions such as "should you ban this kind of speech". It should not be assumed as a proxy for it.Why do you think that? The question asked was whether "offensive online content is taken seriously" or not.
It exists within the context of a Republican / conservative narrative that social media companies silence them, so it cannot help but reflect the extent to which different groups trust social media, and thus again does not clearly address free speech.Not quite. I mean, it's all there in black and white.
Firstly, you should be well aware of the concept of margins of errors in polls. A difference between (for instance) 79% and 84% in a single poll is not significant.The third shows that democrats are more likely than Republicans in all cases to censor speakers.
Secondly, virtually all these topics are ideologically-biased topics which typically press Democrat buttons more than Republican. It renders the poll unfit for the aim you want to claim it for, because the methodology is biased.
* * *
Finally, and relevant to the anecdote I brought up about the UK student societies, what actually is free speech?
One might consider things like academic freedom, or freedom from financial influence (e.g. advertisers), or editorial control, or intimidation, etc. When the right wants to discuss freedom of speech, they deliberately restrict the meaning to only a narrow consideration that suits them. The debate is fundamentally dishonest where a side decides it has sole right to set the parameters.