This is very interesting — but I think there is a misunderstanding. The Global Times editor, famous for his arrogant chauvinist bluster, probably means “free speech” selectively, for himself but not for his enemies.
There was in January what looked like an incident related to this: the Global Times wrote in the usually accusatory fashion against the kidnapped booksellers from Hong Kong — but this was before there had been any other official word on the five kidnapped men, let alone any admittance that they were being held captive by Chinese authorities. In a special article, the Boxun news service claimed that Global Times editors were then reprimanded/punished for jumping the gun on this issue — this likely since the authorities not only want to choreograph confessions, but also use the silence itself, the absence of news of, or word about, the kidnapping victims, as a tool for whipping up feelings of fear in the family and friends of those taken, and, to cause fear and trembling more widely, as they still continue to do now).
See: 独家：铜锣湾书店事件《环球时报》“代言中央”乱解签惹高层不满 (博讯北京时间2016年1月07日 综合报道). Jan. 7, 2016.
http://boxun.com/news/gb/china/2016/01/201601072358.shtml
(Boxun publishes in both Chinese and English, http://en.boxun.com, but this article was not translated)
Yrs,
Magnus Fiskesjö <nf42@cornell.edu>