Okay and?
What do you mean, and? They're clarifying the original point, as was expressly requested in the parent comment. The image undoubtedly has some amount of "artistic freedom" taken. What threshold decides when an image becomes more art than science is a parameter that each person is free to decide for themselves. I think it's absolutely relevant to discussion to point out that there might be more "artistic freedom" in this image than most might believe, especially when the post is about photos of the sun of a much more scientific and exact nature.
My point is in what was is “well actually it’s not technically a photograph” helpful, interesting, or relevant contribution to discussion?
Great. It’s not strictly a graph of photons. Zero people are using this stitched together image to perform science. Moreover, virtually every single space image intended for public consumption has been converted from UV/radio/infrared into the visible spectrum, retouched, stitched together as a composite, or experienced some other form of artistic manipulation.
Nobody cares. Nobody should care. This is a thoroughly inconsequential hill to die on and a completely pointless bit of pedantry.