Dawkins's actual writings and speakings, the nature of his influence in the real world, is consistently misrepresented by people who don't like him, in company with those who feel attacked by him. To the extent they are successful, they establish a representation of his influence that those influenced by Dawkins quite honestly and sincerely do not recognize. To the extent they are even more successful they mediate the influence, create a fictional Dawkins who has the influence they describe.
His popularity as a renowned atheist, and such, has been declining in recent years, I think because of his pedophilia remarks. There was a strange episode, recently, when he went weirdly supremacist on behalf of Christian church bells, but it's true he is not nearly so popular. Go back several years; try our Religion Archives. You're not wrong that he's a bogeyman in a lot of religious retort to atheism, but there is a distancing and forgetting—an erasure—taking place. It need not be calculated; indeed, there are reasons why the tweet I posted in #5↑ even exists, despite its apparent intention to swing at Peterson.