I had some clothes to iron so in order not to waste too much time I tried to do the ironing while watching Lou Bondi interview Norman Lowell. Ironing the clothes was a useful exercise. Watching the prime time show on TVM was a disgusting experience which, to add insult to injury, was unfortunately partly funded by my own taxes.

Lou was well prepared. He did his homework well. Whatever Lowell said, Lou had a reaction or an answer to. He managed to keep a straight face throughout the programme; definitely not a mean feat. The programme was a good example of loaded humour. I have no problem with the way the programme was produced. My problem lies with the fact that the programme was produced! Worse still: it was produced on national TV and during a respectable news show.

The producers can say that the programme was aired to respect Lowell right to spead his opinions. PBS has the right to equally apportion time between political parties and it thus have a duty to give time to Lowell and his party. Oh, I see. Should I write that I am impressed by such a high moral ground attitude to broadcasting? I prefer to just write: pull the other one.

The producers can say that they wanted to show Lowell as he really is: a fanatic, a buffoon and a dangerous person. This is a more credible argument. However, this does not justify the broadcasting of the programme. Those who before the programme thought that Lowell is a fanatic buffoon still think the same about the man. But, he has been proving himself to be so for the last twenty years or so. There was nothing new in the programme which gave us a deeper insight into the man's fanaticism. Seen from this perspective the programme was a sheer waste of time.

For some (perhaps, most) of the above, the programme was also an occasion for entertainment. People smsed or phoned others telling that to watch TVM and to laugh to their hearts' content by the contents of the programme being broadcast. These viewers are slighting Bondi+ by their comments as Lou's programme is not a comedy show. Seen from this perspective the programme tarnished the credibility of the producer.

Those who before the programme thought that Lowell is a great person still think that he is fantastic. Now they love him more as the programme - in their estimation - was another example of persecution against Lowell. He has the guts to say in public what they believe but do not have the courage to say in public themselves. Our public service broadcaster increased and not decreased Lowell estimation in the eyes of his followers. Seen from this perspective the programme was a failure.

Many others - generally vulnerable people - must have been offended, hurt or even frightened. This list includes people who adopted children from African countries. Some could believe that their loved ones could be in danger of being exiled from Malta. Disabled persons and their families must have felt offended. They will be more gravely offended if PBS foolishly tries to defend its mistaken decision to let the programme be broadcast by saying that Lowell has the right to air his venom and hate on national TV.

What irked me most about the programme was its lack of context which could have perhaps justified the hurt caused because of some overriding public interest. A friend of mine smsed me with the question: is there a survey going on now? His is a very cynic position. Many people will accuse Lou of selling himself for ratings. I do not share this position. I am sure that the reasons Lou had for producing the programme were good and praiseworthy. I think he did it believing the programme would discredit Lowell. I do not doubt his intention but I also believe that he was totally off the mark.

I fear that now presenters of lesser stature than Lou would invite Lowell to their programme as this is how the media circus works. They would not be as prepared as Lou was and consequently Lowell would fare better in such programmes. This would give Lowell more publicity.

Lowell is a nobody. Election result after election result showed that he has not succeeded in riding the xenophobic attitude of many Maltese. He has been given his fair share of exposure which could have then been justified by the argument that people had to be informed about the monstrosity of his ideas. To-day, I think, that argument is no longer valid. He is just a fringe politician spouting hate. There is no place for the propagation of hate on public service TV.

PBS should take an editorial decision that Lowell would not be given coverage on the station barring exceptional circumstances due to some overriding public interest.

Would I be asking too much if I urge PBS to publicly apologise for this mistake?