Pauline Hanson’s highly publicised meetings with controversial far-right figures in the UK will drive international eyeballs to her content and continue building the global brand – and that’s by design, far-right experts say.

The One Nation leader is visiting on a “fact-finding mission” with her chief-of-staff, James Ashby, ticking off a number of the country’s most divisive personalities.

It comes as the opposition leader, Angus Taylor, warned disaffected voters who “feel like lighting a match” that supporting One Nation “isn’t worth the eternity of pain that will follow”.

“They’re a one-person show. Their policies are incoherent,” he told ABC radio on Friday.

Hanson’s meet-and-greets have so far included pop star turned radical-right royalty, Holly Valance, Reform UK officials and far-right activist and convicted criminal, Tommy Robinson.

The Queensland senator will also feature in an upcoming long-form podcast with Robinson, whose real name is Stephen Yaxley-Lennon. Yaxley-Lennon is perhaps best known in Australia as the man whose appearance on Karl Stefanovic’s podcast in June led to Channel Nine severing ties with their former golden boy.

Yaxley-Lennon is an anti-Islamic, far-right political activist, known for his role in major UK anti-immigration marches, and is a vocal supporter of Russia, including its invasion of Ukraine.

Beyond his political views, Yaxley-Lennon’s rap sheet is long. The 43-year-old was given a five-year stalking protection order and has twice been convicted for contempt of court.

He was jailed in 2024 for repeating false claims about a 15-year-old Syrian refugee in defiance of a court injunction.

Hanson’s decision to join him on his podcast was no doubt linked to his recent appearance on Stefanovic’s podcast.

While the video was removed from various platforms, and Stefanovic lost his lucrative position as the Today show’s host, One Nation re-published the interview on its social media channels.

Far-right researchers told Guardian Australia the move has all the hallmarks of an effective and proven digital strategy – one that works whether or not the mainstream media take notice.

Dr Imogen Richards, a criminology researcher at Deakin University, said announcing or appearing on podcasts with contentious counterparts was akin to a “pseudo event” that’s as much about the publicity as it is about the content.

“The aim of these types of manoeuvres by more fringe, or formerly more fringe, political actors is to shift the Overton window and move the parameters of public political debate rightward,” she said.

Richards said Hanson’s rise in popularity meant her decisions between now and the federal election couldn’t be ignored, or dismissed as attention-grabbing.

“What [Hanson’s] doing is building international far-right alliances and signposting them,” she said.

Researchers for the anti-fascist group, White Rose Society, said their meeting served the “attention economy” with a shared hostility aimed at “the normalisation of violence against non-white people”.

“We think in reporting on this, it’s important to identify the agenda that the people involved are trying to push and avoid furthering it,” a spokesperson said.

“Meetings like this should be reported on, but where we find the media fails is in reporting them either in their own terms or in a watered-down version of their own terms.

“For Hanson and Yaxley-Lennon, their version is that this is a meeting of minds between two firebrands unafraid to speak their truth and unafraid of being cancelled simply for the crime of sharing ideas. What those ideas are isn’t important.”

Dr Kurt Sengul, a far-right researcher at Macquarie University, said One Nation didn’t mind generating negative headlines as it played into its victim narrative against establishment media and politics.

“Unlike mainstream parties, who do everything possible to avoid controversy and scandal, far-right parties actively seek scandal and controversy and actively derive benefit from even negative coverage,” he said.

Sengul said One Nation’s content-creation strategy is effective, publishing popular videos that reach millions of otherwise apathetic or apolitical voters few parties could reach through mainstream media.

“I think it’s an under-appreciated aspect of One Nation’s rise,” he said.

“A big part of One Nation’s success is that the media consistently, since 1996, have provided her and her party with disproportionate media coverage on platforms relative to their electoral footprint.

“[Now they’re] attaining publicity, but also creating their own content so they’re able to connect with supporters and disseminate their message without the interference or mediation of journalists.”

Jordan McSwiney, an expert in far-right politics at the University of Canberra, said he would have once urged media not to cover One Nation’s stunts but with her rise in popularity, “the horse has bolted”.

McSwiney said the best approach politicians and mainstream media could take was to focus on explaining who these figures are behind the scenes.

“Don’t tell the story that Tommy Robinson wants you to tell,” he said.