BBC Radio 4 listeners were split following the a 50th anniversary broadcast and analysis of Enoch Powell's controversial 'rivers of blood' speech.

The anti mass immigration speech, read out in segments by actor Ian McDiarmid, was first delivered to local Conservative party members in Birmingham, ahead of a second reading of the 1968 race relations bill.

The speech, was broken up into segments and critiqued by a panel, including by BBC media editor Amol Rajan, who examined the influence of the speech since it was first delivered.

Scroll down for video

The anti-immigration speech, which will be read out in segments by actor Ian McDiarmid, was first delivered to local Conservative party members in Birmingham, ahead of a second reading of the 1968 race relations bill (Enoch Powell, pictured in 1979)

Powell attacked the government's immigration policy, called for less immigration and urged those already in the UK to return to their country of origin.

But listeners are split over whether the programme it was insensitive or insightful.

The speech referred to a white constituent who feared 'the black man having the whip hand over the white man' and ended by ominously predicting rivers of blood.

The BBC has said the broadcast was a 'rigorous journalistic analysis of a historical political speech' and 'not an endorsement of the controversial views'.

‏Some listeners welcomed the broadcast.

Paul Embery wrote on Twitter: 'Archive on 4 about Enoch Powell, was insightful, sensitive, analytical and balanced.

The speech, will be broken up into segments, and critiqued by a panel, including by BBC media editor Amol Rajan, who will examine the influence of the speech since it was first delivered

'The idea, peddled by the usual self-appointed censors, that it would persuade hordes of Radio 4 listeners to become violent racists was always preposterous.'

And @JeremyDuns wrote: 'Didn't see anything wrong with Radio 4's programme on Enoch Powell. Solid documentary, and the full speech made it clearer just how racist and wrong it was (also pompous). I'd have preferred to hear Powell than an actor.'

Labour peer Lord Andrew Adonis had asked watchdog Ofcom to intervene and instruct the BBC not to broadcast the speech, which he describes as 'incendiary and racist'.

‏Some listeners welcomed the broadcast. Paul Embery wrote on Twitter: 'Archive on 4 about Enoch Powell, was insightful, sensitive, analytical and balanced'

Many on social media attacked the programme as being insensitive and untimely.

John Biggins wrote: 'I lasted five minutes into Enoch Powell's dismal, banal 'rivers of blood' speech ... before turning it off. Why would anyone want to listen to that drivel let alone analyse it on radio?'

Another said: 'I tuned in with an open mind but I am appalled already.'

Phoebe Rose wrote: 'I cannot believe Enoch Powell's speech is being air on BBC radio.'

Many on social media attacked the programme as being insensitive and untimely

The speech divided a nation and defined Powell's political legacy, serving as inspiration for right wing political movements such as the BNP, EDL and Britain First.

But journalist and programme maker Sathnam Sanghera, whose parents moved from India to Wolverhampton at the time of Powell's speech, said it was intended as a retrospective discussion on why Powell had been proved wrong.

In a letter to Ofcom chief executive Sharon White, Labour peer Lord Adonis called on the media regulator to 'instruct the BBC to cancel the proposed broadcast.

He wrote: 'It seems extraordinary that one should have to make the argument in today's Britain that Powell's speech is an incitement to racial hatred and violence which should not be broadcast.

'If a contemporary politician made such a speech they would almost certainly be arrested and charged with serious offences.'