Should media outlets from dictatorships be banned from broadcasting.

[Something completely different]

No. Let me rephrase:

The fact that people who murdered honest journalist would nonetheless have a worthwhile story to tell, which you can't hear from honest journalists, is a fact that offers an unusually penetrating insight into how the world really works.

The potential for this insight alone is worth giving murders of honest journalists an ability to speak to public.

Ah ok, thank you for your patience.

I would dought that they wouldn`t have a oppertunety to tell their story.
After all everyone saw Achmedinijads speech at the UN.
And when Putin was asked by journalists why he treated the oppositon so harsh he said he does that because his opposition consisted only of homosexuals and pedophiles. That itself delivers a pritty clear insight into how their world works.
My question is - should we let those people broadcast 24 hours a day their pittyfull excuses for commiting their crimes in our countries?
They have their chance to explain themselves, but should they be given the chance to indoctrinate a democracies population and calling it "journalism"?

No. What is the difference between one government who only allows approved broadcasters to disseminate information? It seems to me that this, in an attempt to avoid becoming like "them", that we adopt similar methods (sanctioning which opinions can and cannot be broadcast).
Were this to be done, who shall we appoint to judge what is objective?
Just no.

One can set up standerds to what is journalism, what is opinion publishing and what is simply outright propaganda aimed to indoctrinate and deceive.
I dont mistrust democratic institutions such as a high court to a level at which i believe it will make biased or eaven undemocratic decisions.
But i know that the US hight court consists of biased judges - therefor there might be a cultural difference here.
Our highcourt is payed to not have a political opinion and to make reasonable decisions on german law.