Reporter Kameron Virk on why he feels the best response we can have to Katie Hopkins is one where she’s left to fade into obscurity.

Whether because of her classist stance on children’s names, her Sun column labelling migrants and refugees “cockroaches”, or after foolishly clicking on her Twitter feed and reading 140 characters filled with hate, most people have felt anger towards Katie Hopkins.

But actually, the best way to respond to Hopkins is to ignore her completely. The Hopkins brand thrives on the attention she receives for her inflammatory comments, regardless of whether the attention is condemnatory or not. Yes, much better to ignore her completely – while also combating her arguments with logic and fact.

Students at Brunel University set a great example for those of us who can’t help but engage with her tweets or leave comments on her articles. After Hopkins was invited to talk at the uni’s debate about the welfare state, the students got to their feet and turned their backs, before silently walking out. The lack of attention, and the disgust conveyed within it, would’ve stung the 40-year-old more than any words could have done.

It’s hard to tell from the video, but Hopkins looks a little dumbfounded as the students begin to leave. She might have been sat there with a big smile on her face, but there’s no denying how awkward you’d feel if your mere presence at a debate sparked a mass exodus – that a group of people think so lowly of you and your opinions that your existence is only briefly acknowledged by them leaving.

Students’ reasons for the walk out ranged from “she’s here promoting herself as a professional troll” to her lack of any “academic credentials”, to it being “inflammatory” to invite Hopkins to celebrate Brunel’s 50th year at such a “diverse campus”.

Here are a few of the students sharing their thoughts on Brunel inviting Hopkins, and why they disagreed with her presence.

Hopkins clearly expected some kind of reaction from the Brunel students…

But probably not the one that she got – and that’s why it was so effective. For someone so used to being a hate figure, someone who has effectively built their self-worth on how much they’re hated, the best thing you can do is not hate them. The best thing you can do is not acknowledge them at all.

Who knows why Hopkins is the way she is, and why she felt it necessary to build this persona? Who knows why she’s happier accepting insults than compliments? Or why she feels like she’s at a place in life where no-one is above her judgment?

It doesn’t matter. She doesn’t matter.

I’m not going to say she’s irrelevant, because that’s dangerous. Hopkins has a core group of readers and fans who clearly feel she represents them and their views – and that’s fine. But without action like that taken by the Brunel students – dignified and with potential personal consequences for Hopkins – we risk allowing the message that intolerance is winning, and should be allowed to win, to pervade. One of the strongest ways we can display that it isn’t is by not even engaging with Hopkins, and creating the country we want to see without her.