On Thursday, following pressure from tens of thousands of SumOfUs members, PayPal ended its business relationship with the far-right activist and former leader of the English Defence League, Tommy Robinson. It is a welcome victory for those of us involved in the campaign – but it also highlights a worrying deeper trend. Tech giants only seem willing to do the right thing after coming under sustained public pressure. On its own terms, PayPal should have dropped Robinson ages ago. The company’s acceptable use policy forbids “the promotion of hate, violence, racial or other forms of intolerance that is discriminatory”. Yet it took months of public pressure and nearly 65,000 petition signatures before the company took action.

The impact of PayPal revoking its services should not be underestimated. Anti-fascism experts at Hope not Hate estimated Robinson could make more than £1m in donations from a US tour, much of it processed through PayPal. The company’s decision comes at a critical moment. Next week, Robinson could speak at US Congress on the invitation of Arizona representative Paul Gosar. This is apparently the first leg of an international tour to strengthen his ties with the global far-right movement. The proceeds would probably be reinvested in promoting his ideas at home in the UK.

Tech companies such as PayPal and Mastercard have much to answer for on that front. Social media platforms and online payment processors bring “likes”, donations and visibility at the touch of a button. It took until March of this year for Facebook to ban now-dwindling far-right group Britain First, despite its page posting videos comparing immigrants to animals and describing its leaders as “Islamaphobic and proud”. Mastercard and Visa continue to process donations for both Britain First and Robinson.

These companies have their own profit motive, of course. PayPal and other household-name credit card companies have profited while making their minds up about extremists such as Robinson. We can assume that PayPal took its standard cut of around 3% of the money given to Robinson. But in the longer term, this approach isn’t good for business, either. The company’s reluctance to cut ties with Robinson is at odds with its commitment to foster trust among users. It relies on a good reputation with its customers, who trust the company with huge sums of money on daily basis. Yet it is only when that reputation is jeopardised by a major public campaign that it is moved to actually act on these issues.

This is not just a moral argument. Opponents of Robinson’s nonsense – not to mention those directly affected by his narrow-mindedness – still vastly outnumber his supporters among PayPal’s customer base. Its market skews heavily towards those who want nothing to do with him. If for no other reason than economic necessity, companies need to up their game.

From Jair Bolsonaro and Donald Trump in the Americas to Matteo Salvini and Viktor Orbán in Europe, there is now little doubting the resurgence of the far right globally. It’s tempting to blame a single charismatic figurehead – Trump, Steve Bannon, Robinson. But these individuals rely on existing systems and institutions to function. Unless companies take action on these issues, they are helping to rejuvenate an ideology that had previously spent decades in retreat.

For SumOfUs members, convincing PayPal to back away from its support of Robinson represents a great success. It’s proof that people power can take on huge corporations and win. It would be even better if the need for public pressure was eliminated altogether, for these companies to recognise the role they can and must play in pushing back the rise of the far right.

• Hannah Lownsbrough is executive director of SumOfUs, an organisation using people power to hold the biggest companies in the world to account