\n\n“We know deplatforming works to combat online extremism because researchers have studied what happens when extremist communities get routed from their \u201chomes\u201d on the internet.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Radical extremists across the political spectrum use social media<\/a> to spread their messaging, so deplatforming those extremists makes it harder for them to recruit. Deplatfoming also decreases their influence; a 2016 study of ISIS deplatforming<\/a> found, for example, that ISIS \u201cinfluencers\u201d lost followers and clout as they were forced to bounce around from platform to platform. And when was the last time you heard the name Milo Yiannopoulos? After the infamous right-wing instigator was banned from Twitter<\/a> and his other social media homes in 2016, his influence and notoriety plummeted. Right-wing conspiracy theorist Alex Jones met a similar fate when he and his media network Infowars were deplatformed across social media<\/a> in 2018.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The more obscure and hard to access an extremist\u2019s social media hub is, the less likely mainstream internet users are to stumble across the group and be drawn into its rhetoric. That\u2019s because major platforms like Facebook and Twitter generally act as gateways for casual users; from there, they move into the smaller, more niche platforms where extremists might congregate. If extremists are banned from those major platforms, the vast majority of would-be recruits won\u2019t find their way to those smaller niche platforms. “<\/p>\n\n\n\n …<\/p>\n\n\n\n “Deplatforming disrupts extremists\u2019 ability to communicate with one another, and in some cases creates a barrier to continued participation in the group. A 2018 study tracking a deplatformed British extremist group<\/a> found that not only did the group\u2019s engagement decrease after it was deplatformed, but so did the amount of content it published online. <\/p>\n\n\n\n …<\/p>\n\n\n\n “When internet communities send a message of zero tolerance toward white supremacists and other extremists, other users also grow less tolerant and less likely to indulge extremist behavior and messaging. For example, after Reddit banned several notorious subreddits in 2015, leaving many toxic users no place to gather, a 2017 study<\/a> of the remaining communities on the site found that hate speech decreased across Reddit.” <\/p>\n\n\n\n …<\/p>\n\n\n\n “As for the extremists, the opposite effect often takes place. Extremist groups have typically had to sand off their more extreme edges to be welcomed on mainstream platforms. So when that still isn\u2019t enough and they get booted off a platform like Twitter or Facebook, wherever they go next tends to be a much laxer, less restrictive, and, well, extreme internet location. That often changes the nature of the group, making its rhetoric even more extreme.”<\/p>\n\n\n\n …<\/p>\n\n\n\n “One of the most frequent arguments against deplatforming is that it\u2019s a violation of free speech. This outcry is common whenever large communities are targeted based on the content of their tweets, like when Twitter finally did start banning Nazis<\/a> by the thousands. The bottom line is that social media purges are not subject to the First Amendment rule that protects Americans\u2019 right to free speech.” <\/p>\n\n\n\n …<\/p>\n\n\n\n “\u201cSome argue that certain websites have gotten so large that they\u2019ve become the de facto \u2018public square,\u2019\u201d he said, \u201cand thus should be held to the First Amendment\u2019s speech-protective standards.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n