On air: Does banning people do more harm than good?

Michael Savage had no plans to enter the UK he says, but should he want to, he won’t be allowed. Along with radical islamist preachers and a jewish extremist, the American ‘shock jock ‘ has been listed on a ‘banned list’ of sixteen people, just published by the British Home Office. It’s brought instant notoriety and untold publicity a man who was previously virtually unknown to people outside his native America. So does banning people just do more harm than good, by fanning the flames of publicity and making a new audience aware of their views?

Talking Points: 6th May

A US radio DJ says he’s going to sue the British government because they’ve banned him from the UK. He says he’s being compared “with mass murderers who killed Jews on buses”. He also says the Koran is a book of hate but doesn’t think he promotes violence.

In the US there’s even a campaign to keep a Free Speech Tunnel which had graffiti saying Barack Obama should be shot.

Where is the line between free speech versus hate speech? Is better to let people speak but ignore them?