> The data suggests that deplatforming works. Milo; Katie Hopkins; InfoWars et al have all lost their former agenda-setting influence following deplatforming. And studies have shown that banning hate sub-Reddits does _not_ cause that content to “pop up elsewhere”, it causes it to decline overall.

This is simply not an accurate representation of history.

Milo Yiannopoulos fell out of popularity because of repeated issues with pedophilia, which even the right doesn't condone.

Katie Hopkins was financially ruined Monroe v. Hopkins[1].

InfoWars still has a larger readership than The Economist or Newsweek[2], so I'm not sure where you get the idea that they have lost influence. It sounds like you might be inside of an echo chamber.

You may be looking at a different study, but the only study[3] I know of on the banning of hate sub-Reddits showed that content didn't pop up elsewhere on Reddit. It doesn't show that the hate didn't just move over to Voat, which is my theory as to what happened. Yes, the study was publicized as "deplatforming works", but only because people didn't know where the people who were deplatformed went.

The rest of your post follows suit with claims that aren't based in reality.

[1] by https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monroe_v_Hopkins

[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/InfoWars (top section)

[3] https://techcrunch.com/2017/09/11/study-finds-reddits-contro...