No platforming doesn't necessarily work. The issue is where extreme views are the only ones platformed because the media deems them as somehow representative and that they provoke healthy discussion. Except they don't, they just polarise debate and make it very inarticulate and dumbed down.
Why aren't C4 platforming the other side of the debate? Is it because they are transphobic or is it because it's not sensationalist enough and doesn't drive enough attention? Is it because it's too nuanced and not sound bitey enough because it's not black and white.
The media's job is supposed to present a representative range of views in a democracy. This way extreme views don't get too much air time, and reasonable and considered opinions which reflect the views of society get the airtime they should.
Except they have failed in this, in recent years in pursuit of clicks, viewing figures and revenue instead of journalistic integrity.
It put feminists in the position where in being reasonable in itself gets you no platformed by default. Arguably in this context feminists would have to get loud, shouty, abusive and militant to get platformed a lot of the time. That's really not what I want not would advocate. It is, however, where I see it ending up going. This is what devisive politics does and what the media chasing figures not the story results in.
Go on C4 prove me wrong. Get someone bloody decent on for the other side of this.