When the news media or echo chamber of social media blocks someone who offers an opinion they deem ‘dangerous’ they do not silence them, they amplify them for two reasons.

The first reason is that they can find outlets elsewhere they can not control.  Joe Rogan has thirteen times the followers of CNN and he asks great questions and will take hours to interview. Substack offers credible journalists an open venue without the censorship of media management.

By blocking legitimate opinions that are unacceptable to media gatekeepers the gatekeepers lose credibility and the trust of the viewers.  In this environment conspiracy theories blossom.  When you trust nothing you will believe anything.

Instead of cancelling or blocking controversial opinions they would be wiser to address them with factual evidence , but that would require real work and an open mind that another legitimate viewpoint is even possible.  Just blocking or canceling them is much easier.  Without intellectual diversity at a publication and a sense of journalistic ethics these institutions lose the trust and will render themselves irrelevant.