The other thing the BBC is in the news for is a row over impartiality.
It concerns every Corbynista's least favourite BBC journalist, Laura Kuenssberg.
A draft BBC Trust ruling on a Laura K reports on BBC One's News at Six about Jeremy Corbyn was leaked to The Herald newspaper and the draft ruling found:
There was a significant difference between what Mr Corbyn said and what the report inferred. This led to a failure of due accuracy. Trustees considered that the effect of the failures to observe due accuracy had, on this occasion, also resulted in a failure of impartiality.
...though it said there was "no evidence of any intent to deceive or distort".
The BBC disagrees with the BBC Trust's draft ruling (especially as Laura K was apparently not spoken to by the BBC Trust), and has asked the BBC Trust to re-think the matter - and the BBC Trust has duly obliged the BBC by so doing - which is nice of them.
As you can probably guess, Twitter has been absolutely overflowing with Corbyn supporters over the last couple of days saying 'Told you so!', calling the BBC 'Tories' and demanding action against the hated Ms Kuenssberg.
That leak is proving awkward for the BBC. Wonder who leaked it? Someone pro-Corbyn at the BBC maybe?
(Sue barges in)
(Sue barges in)
A little more on this topic, if you’ll pardon the intrusion.
“The complaint related to a report on News at Six in which Kuenssberg said that she had asked Mr Corbyn if he would support a shoot-to-kill policy in the event of a Paris-style attack. A pre-recorded interview showed the Labour leader responding: “I’m not happy with a shoot-to-kill policy in general. I think that is quite dangerous and I think can often be counterproductive.”
A viewer complained that the clip was misleading because Mr Corbyn had been asked if he would order the police or military to shoot to kill on Britain’s streets without any reference to the Paris attacks.”
Of course, if he had been asked the same question in direct relation to the Paris attacks he might have modified his reply a little, so I think the complaint has a fair(ish) point. It still doesn’t put Corbyn in a very edifying light though.
“The viewer also complained that the same news report wrongly presented Mr Corbyn as opposing the government’s security measures.”
Well, does he oppose them or doesn’t he? Rigid pacifism has its drawbacks.
However, the BBC (I know it’s not alone) has a habit of setting little traps for politicians it dislikes and taking bits of the reply out of context to present later as evidence against them. It’s such a common practice that if the BBC Trust does uphold this complaint, surely they’re setting a rather dangerous precedent.
