Online:
Visits:
Stories:

By Philosophers Stone
Contributor profile | More stories

Story Views
Now:
Last Hour:
Last 24 Hours:
Total:

A BBC Editor has Spelled Out Why the Broadcaster’s Bias Is Justified, and it’s Utterly Outrageous [Video]

Saturday, October 22, 2016 13:16

% of readers think this story is Fact. Add your two cents.

(Before It's News)

An ex-editor at the BBC has explained why, and when, bias at the public broadcaster is acceptable, according to the Media Reform Coalition (MRC). The justification was discussed during the first event of the Real Media Tour. And it shows that, while licence fee payers cough up for the entire year, some working at the broadcaster seem to believe true ‘impartiality’ is only necessary at certain times.

The BBC’s newsroom standards

Real Media’s first stop on its tour was Manchester. The event featured a line-up of speakers including its own Kam Sandhu, and author of The BBC: A Myth of Public Service, Tom Mills. The MRC’s Des Freedman also spoke at the event.

Freedman explained that the MRC had carried out research into the BBC’s coverage of the Labour leadership election. And it found “clear and consistent bias in favour of critics of Jeremy Corbyn”. Freedman then noted that, consequently, the BBC had dismissed the MRC as a “vested interest group”. Yet the broadcaster didn’t refute any of the findings.

Freedman continued:

And we heard from the inside – someone rang up anonymously, and has followed it up actually… Some producer – I think it was based in Manchester – who’d been told when they complained about what they saw as overt bias against Corbyn, that a senior Five Live producer said ‘well, it’s alright because we don’t have to follow due impartiality if it’s not an election’.

A leadership battle, not a problem

Freedman is actually referring to a written complaint published in the BBC’s internal magazine Ariel. The complaint was made by the Five Live studio director Eddie Pitman over the “character assassination” of Corbyn in a Panorama programme that had run prior to the 2015 Labour leadership election. The Panorama editor at the time, Ceri Thomas, responded by listing the coverage of the institution as a whole and insisted the programme was “fair” to Corbyn. He dismissed the complaint, partly based on the assertion “we’re not in general election territory” right now.

So, as Freedman acknowledged, although UK citizens pay a yearly license fee, some at the BBC seem to only consider ‘impartiality’ truly important when an election is happening. And seemingly, Labour leadership elections don’t count.

Is BBC bias allowed?

The BBC responded to The Canary‘s request for comment on the Panorama incident with the following statement:

The BBC is editorially independent and our news adheres to clear impartiality guidelines. Corbyn’s team gave Panorama behind the scenes access to his campaign and his views were reflected throughout, including through a lengthy interview.

But although this statement professes a commitment to impartiality by the broadcaster, ample evidence suggests it is not living up that oath. An oath, in fact, that is explicitly written into the broadcaster’s own ethics. The BBC’s values clearly state that:

Trust is the foundation of the BBC: we are independent, impartial and honest.

Furthermore, the Royal Charter and Agreement, which is the constitutional basis for the BBC, asserts:

The BBC will aim to produce high-quality and distinctive journalism that meets the highest standards of accuracy, fairness and impartiality. It will respond to the Trust’s regular reviews of impartiality to ensure strong editorial processes and training.