It is an enormously broad statute. Many would say too much so. This article[1] advocates that it is too broad, but provides some useful examples of how it has been interpreted and applied. Whether or not it was intended to cover something like this is not really relevant as to whether or not the statute was violated. I think what you might be getting at is the question of whether or not the statute is unconstitutionally vague, which is a pretty good argument, but has been mostly rejected by the courts.

[1] https://repository.jmls.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?referer=http...