This has happened in cycles for almost a year. It is one of the biggest remaining problems with steemit, though we haven't really come up with a fix for it, though we do have ideas we've all discussed, but those ideas don't really matter unless steemit inc. decides to experiment and try some of the ideas out. I do know steemit inc. is working on quite a few things for the future, but I don't know how likely they are to do something about this.

The argument of course will be that it wasn't censored since it is still on the blockchain. That too me is equivalent to saying "it wasn't censored you can file a Freedom of Information Act request". What are the odds someone is going to be viewing the blockchain in a way to monitor for such posts. Then there is the funding side of things. If a person cannot earn when some people appreciate their work because a powerful person(s) down votes it then that could be a form of financial censorship. They'll argue then "if they are here only for the money they don't need to be". Which arguing that someone doesn't view Steemit the same way you think they should is kind of silly too if we plan on having a lot of people here. We'll end up with many people, using it for many reasons, and we don't need people deciding who and who cannot benefit from and enjoy steemit. That is negative PR as you said.

These things go in cycles. I've been very vocal about this in the past. I've also warned of exactly what you describe, them doing this to someone with a large following and causing negative PR outside of steemit.