Should extremists be banned from public discussion platforms?



All you need to know about the world this 
week
SEE ALL ISSUES
EDITOR'S LETTER
The people decide
NEWS FEATURE 1
Raising the stakes: Trump and Kim edge closer to nuclear war
NEWS FEATURE 2
Facebook's identity crisis
DIGEST AMERICAS
The arrests of two fugitive governors arouse suspicion in Mexico
DIGEST AMERICAS
Will the Odebrecht corruption scandal bury Lula’s legend?
DIGEST EUROPE
France’s four-horse election race leaves Europe in the balance
DIGEST EUROPE
Britain gears up for a snap Brexit election
DIGEST ASIA-PACIFIC
Trump signals lethal intent with the ‘Mother of All Bombs’
DIGEST ASIA-PACIFIC
Vigilante justice reigns strong in Pakistan
DIGEST AFRICA
Road rage in Zambia: Opposition leader faces treason charge
DIGEST AFRICA
A report adds to the controversy over Ethiopia's Oromo protests
DIGEST MIDDLE EAST
Palestinian prisoners go on mass hunger strike
DIGEST MIDDLE EAST
Syria’s ‘four towns’ evacuation deal turns into a massacre
THE PICTURE
A baptism of fireworks
GOOD NEWS
Tropical diseases are being treated at an unprecedented rate
Rain for famine-struck Somalia
THE  INFOGRAPHIC
Where on Earth did that come from?
IN SCIENCE
Can drugs really take you to a higher state of consciousness?
IN MEDICINE
Three-foot ‘giant worm’ discovered in Philippines
IN TECHNOLOGY
On a frozen Saturn moon, the ingredients for life
www.theguardian.com
Chechens tell of prison beatings and electric shocks in anti-gay purge: ‘They called us animals’
www.middleeasteye.net
For women only: Coffee, billiards and cards in Gaza cafe
www.bbc.co.uk
Living with the dead - BBC News
DEBATE
POLITICS
Should extremists be banned from public discussion platforms? 3

Calls to no-platform controversial figures have come to the fore in recent years, as the world experiences a rising tide of populism, theocratisation, and alt-right movements. Though many claim that refusing to host extremist speakers jeopardises freedom of speech, some media outlets, university unions, and debating organisations stand by their bans, especially with regard to Islamists who are often tied to anti-Semitism.

Those in favour of no-platforming argue that inviting representatives of extreme religious or socio-political views only ends up giving them mainstream legitimacy. In the wake of far-right leader Marine Le Pen’s highly controversial Remembrance Day appearance on the Andrew Marr Show in the UK, or the WikiLeaks revelations that the US Democratic Party sought to promote extremist Republican figures on the mistaken assumption they’d discredit themselves, there is a growing correlation between influential airtime and the rise once-fringe currents that have proven detrimental to harmonious communal relations - as shown by the spike in hate crimes. But the risk of no-platforming for liberals is that the banned figures gain traction and sympathy as “victims” or “outsider” figures, whose messages of truth are being censored by the establishment. Should opinions from every degree of the political spectrum be given equal and free airing? Are some views just too extreme? And how should democratic systems aspiring to political balance manage fringe entities?

read more
Share Opinion
LATEST
LEADING
L
Add bio
contributions - pts
Submit
A journalistic initiative Sponsored by:
american-express-sponsor
About this
We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website.
If you continue without changing your settings, we'll assume that you are happy to receive all cookies from this website.
OK