As anyone who has played a computer game will know, not all NPCs are alike. The game designers create different types of NPCs, programmed in different ways to say different things to the PCs. The NPC meme is very apt, as it's possible to see the different types of NPCs in today's world. For example:
-
There are those NPCs programmed to 'abide by the narrative'. These NPCs will take talking points from the media, and repeatedly regurgitate these verbatim to those around.
-
On the other hand, there are NPCs also programmed to respond in a certain way to various events. These NPCs will take talking points from the media or external world, and repeatedly regurgitate certain predictable responses to these events. For example, a game designer might make a decision to include a samurai who is not Japanese in their game. NPCs which fit this category will all respond in the same way, by repeatedly pointing out how the game designer was wrong to do this.
The curious thing about second category of NPC is they are programmed to believe they are thinking independently because they are opposing the first group of NPCs, yet their responses are still largely determined by the external events and very predictable. In other words, they can be baited to all respond in the same way so are not actually thinking independently. These NPCs seem to lack the critical thinking or discipline to avoid responding predictably to various stimuli, for example, by choosing to ignore the bait they are given in favor of making their own rational and conscious decisions about what to think and talk about. I blame this on the success of propaganda and loss of impulse control and decline of intellectual discipline as a male virtue, but others may have their theories.
For example, one could ignore the black samurai and talk about actual samurai. Build your own ideas and have your own debates. Not devote your focus on the enemies content and having the debates that your enemies want you to have.
Except a lie unchallenged quickly becomes the truth, and a society's perception of truth influences the nature of all future ideas and debates.
The backlash has discredited the notion of a black samurai, one that has been appearing in media with increasing regularity, for many unfamiliar with the surrounding history. For those, it has also drawn attention to the media's gaslighting, and further reinforced a desire to financially punish companies pushing such propaganda.
I don't believe the intention was ever debate; Rather the normalisation of black individuals/characters in the context of Japanese culture. Your proposal, in this context, is exactly how that succeeds.
I think you overestimate peoples investment. It has become a subject of passing ridicule. I think you oversimplify the issue to "engagement is bad". Ridicule and disdain can and have been used to immunize collectives against "harmful" ideas.
I appreciate where you are coming from, and there are instances where I'd agree. Where to engage in debate is to cede ground. This just isn't one of them.