By Jason Farrell, home editor

Fox News presenter Tucker Carlson introduced his interview with Tommy Robinson last month by suggesting that the British justice system had fallen to rack and ruin.

He said: "The United Kingdom has become a mere shadow of the nation that gave us freedom of speech and freedom of the press and a host of other things we take for granted, but should probably not take for granted. Nobody knows this better than Tommy Robinson."

Carlson then treated the next seven minutes as a therapy session for poor Tommy who had to endure the nasty politically correct liberals across the pond.

America was being told that he'd been jailed for expressing an opinion that the establishment didn't like. This is how Robinson likes his interviews, if he has to do them at all.


In many ways it's easier to do selfie videos, which he can post to his thousands of supporters on Facebook.

For a while after his recent release from prison, I was frustrated that Robinson hadn't been challenged.

While one of his convictions had been quashed for a retrial, he had actually been found guilty of contempt of court in Canterbury, but was still arguing this was contrary to his rights of free speech.

I wasn't clear whether he simply didn't understand British law (like Tucker Carlson), or had a wilful disregard for it.

He wouldn't talk to me when he came out of prison. His dismissive: "You tell nothing but lies," seemed to come directly from the Trump playbook.

:: Tommy Robinson: I don't care if I incite fear of Muslims

Tommy Robinson after jail release: 'All the mainstream media do is lie'

For several weeks my producer, Andy Hughes, tried to get a sit-down interview.

A couple of times he stood us up. It seemed that, like some politicians, Robinson decided he could better appeal to his supporter base through social media, without the interruption of a journalist's questions.

As journalists we shouldn't just accept this. We should be curious and eager to get answers.

It's not as if the media was ignoring Tommy Robinson. The press pack outside the Old Bailey this week would suggest a high level of interest.

The fact that he was able to make statements about his ongoing case to the assembled media and these were reported verbatim and unchallenged by newspapers - tells me that we are all giving him a platform.

Like it or not the former EDL leader has become a public figure. While his name Tommy Robinson is a fabrication - he is actually called Stephen-Yaxley Lennon - it is nonetheless instantly recognisable.

Perhaps it's hard to stomach that the global campaign to release him from jail following his conviction attracted over 600,000 signatures. But isn't this exactly why we need to at least question him over his claim that he has done nothing wrong?

Image: Supporters celebrated when he was freed on bail in August

He has the potential to become a political force - courted by UKIP, celebrated and supported by the so-called alt-right around the world, his views on Muslims are almost indistinguishable from those the UKIP leader Gerard Batten, who is frequently interviewed.

Steve Bannon, until recently Donald Trump's in-house ideologue, says he is the "backbone" of this country.

Robinson claims to have moved on from the racism of the BNP that he joined in his youth, and the intimidation and violence meted out by the English Defence League that he founded.

Are we not interested then in quizzing him about who he is now, and how he justifies his more recent words and actions?

The point is, I think we learned a few things about Tommy Robinson during my interview, and that is what counts.

My query about whether Robinson had disregard or ignorance about the contempt laws in the Canterbury case was answered. It was a bit of both.

"Sunlight is said to be the best of disinfectants," so said Louis Brandeis in a 1913 Harper's Weekly article entitled What Publicity Can Do.

Tommy Robinson's following has multiplied in darkness. Why? His brand builds on an "us vs them" narrative.

Tommy Robinson is what happens when you treat swathes of society as irredeemable and stupid

He has made an entire career out of telling working-class people that the rich/middle class/establishment have forgotten them.

He makes himself even more attractive by garnering the idea that "the establishment won't touch him". They are scared to air his views. They wouldn't dare interview him, or worse let him video a TV interview, because surely only a censored copy can exist.

Some appear to be saying that the very act of him being interviewed - i.e. given a platform - is problematic because people will be start believing what he says.

Isn't that another way of saying: "When I hear Tommy, I hear a nasty racist because I can tell the difference. But less clever people out there will get turned by him?" That smacks of the elitism he accuses "us" of.

People have brains, minds, and agency, and they can think critically for themselves. Deny them this and it affirms Robinson's rhetoric of "us vs them".

Tommy Robinson is what happens when you treat swathes of society as irredeemable and stupid. When you allow opinions like his to go unchallenged.

I'm not comfortable giving him a platform - but nor am I letting him suggest that the image of him with gaffer-tape over his mouth is a fair metaphor for the state of free speech in this country.

Sky Views is a series of comment pieces by Sky News editors and correspondents, published every morning.

Previously on Sky News: Greg Milam - Let's finish the job and ban fur full stop