I guess I should have use a more specific term. “External influence” is just such a short an convenient concept, but it’s clearly way too broad. What I meant to say is pretty much what you seem to be getting at. The idea is, that banning websites and services will limit the extent of influence one government can intentionally have on another nation. Individual citizens are going to be doing their own thing anyway, and that’s a separate matter.

Here’s a clarification that didn’t fit into the previous post. You can view these things form the perspective of the local government that aims to maintain status quo. If some foreign social media platform is having a negative impact on your country, banning the platform should be a net positive. However, who defines these values? Is it good for the freedom of the people, good for the people in power, or something entirely different. All of that depends on the circumstances and the country you’re in. If the EU blocks Xitter, it’s not quite the same when China is doing the that.