Profiling

You may have read at Guido Fawkes or in the Daily Mail that the BBC had to temporarily withdraw their latest Radio 4 Profile of Conservative cabinet minister Kemi Badenoch.

The programme has now been edited and made available again, but the BBC is being tight-lipped about what they've changed, according to the Mail:

The BBC would not reveal what had been changed in the episode, but it is understood that a claim in the original broadcast, that Mrs Badenoch, 42, had stuck 'male' and 'female' signs on the doors of gender-neutral toilets at her leadership launch venue, was corrected.

This story has a few interesting implications, especially concerning journalism. 

Firstly, I'm intrigued that the Daily Mail couldn't find out what the BBC changed. I've been able to find out though, thanks to TVEyes.

The Mail correctly 'understood' the first change - concerning these signs:

The original broadcast said:

This summer, after Boris Johnson quit as PM, Badenoch threw her hat into the ring to become leader, sticking 'men' and 'ladies' signs on the doors of gender-neutral toilets at her launch venue.

This caused a stir on Twitter with many people quoting a Twitter thread on 12 July - the date of Mrs Badenoch's leadership launch - by leading 'gender-critical' voice Maya Forstater. This called journalists out at the time about it:

This story is not what you think: These are the toilets at Policy Exchange. I first noticed these signs on 17th of May at meeting about sex based rights with various gender critical groups. At first i thought the paper signs had been put up specifically for our benefit. What I think is happening here is that Policy Exchange (or their landlords) put in nice new gender neutral toilets and the staff don't like them. They probably feel uncomfortable. Men leave the seat up etc.. so they've put the signs up for everyone's comfort.

Yet here was BBC Radio 4 repeating this discredited claim four months on.

The edited version goes like this:

It was reported that 'men' and 'ladies' signs were cellotaped on the doors of gender-neutral toilets at her launch venue but evidence later emerged that this had been done before the event.

Even this edit risks being misleading. "Evidence later emerged that this had been done before the event" might suggest that rather than Kemi herself 'sticking' up the signs, it was done "before the event" i.e. done for the launch. What Maya Forstater, and others, showed is that those signs were up a couple of months before the launch, so not connected to Kemi Badenoch in any way.

Indeed, it's so potentially misleading that Guido Fawkes apparently misread the revised version as a simple repetition of the debunked claims from the original version:

Despite the editing, the profile still reeks of W1A’s woke inclinations. It repeats debunked claims about Kemi removing gender-neutral toilets at her campaign launch, albeit with a caveat.

Maybe the programme needs withdrawing and re-editing again to remove this ambiguous wording?

What both Guido and the Mail missed though was the second edit. The original broadcast said:

It's not just race. LGBTQ activists have accused Kemi Badenoch of being anti-trans Ben Hunte, a senior reporter with Vice World News. "I've had for a number of organisations and individuals who are really concerned about Kemi Badenoch's behaviour in government. I've exposed a leaked recording of Kemi Badenoch saying that trans women are men", the government insisting her comments had been taken out of context. "I have released a report about the equalities minister saying she doesn't care about colonialism." She's been criticised for abstaining on a vote to extend same sex marriage rights to Northern Ireland. And this week, ITV News reported that Bedenoch has now paused work on a promised ban on the use of conversion therapy. "There have been a number of situations over the past year that really do kind of raise your eyebrows about what it means to be an equalities minister when you don't necessarily believe in all forms of equality within your portfolio".

The revised version edited out this line:

And this week, ITV News reported that Bedenoch has now paused work on a promised ban on the use of conversion therapy.

That concerns a 'scoop' by ITV's Paul Brand that the Government took to Twitter to dismiss. BBC Radio 4 clearly got cold feet about Paul Brand's journalistic 'scoop' too.

Both Guido and the Daily Mail note the inclusion of the activist-like Ben Hunte. The Mail uses the c-word about him - "controversial":

That made me smile because of how Radio 4's website introduces this programme. They also use the c-word about Kemi Badenoch, asking "Is the controversial trade secretary and equalities minister a future PM?":

Another thing that struck me about controversial Ben Hunte's controversial inclusion is that Radio 4 - unlike the Mail - didn't mention that Ben used to work for the BBC [and got the Corportation into quite a few scrapes]. Profile simply introduced him as "a senior reporter with Vice World News". None of his contributions were re-edited.

A final thing is that the version you can now here on BBC Sounds - which begins by saying that the programme has been edited, but not why ["This programme has been edited since broadcast"] - ends with quite of list of BBC staff behind this edition of Profile: the researcher, producers, production co-ordinators, and editor. 

Not sure I'd have wanted my name on this piece of BBC broadcasting. Maybe they'll be tempted to edit those out next?

John Bolton's moustache

It's not every day that a piece of facial hair gets a whole BBC Radio 4 Profile to itself, but the subject of this week's Profile was US National Security Advisor John Bolton's moustache. 

I'm joking of course, but only just. That moustache got plenty of mentions! 

Fans of BBC hatchet jobs will need to give this a listen, as it's fine example of the form. I'll just quote its opening passage: 

US news reporter: Is John Bolton the most dangerous man in the world? 

Mark Coles: Hmm. Good question! John Bolton,  Donald Trump's National Security Advisor, has been upping the ante with Iran of late, threatening military action - a tactic some fear could lead the two countries to war. "The new Dr. Strangelove", the Washington Post branded him this week. But to others he's an American patriot - a tough-talking hero, albeit one with a slightly silly moustache.

My ears pricked up at this passage from John Peel-impersonator Mark: 

[John Bolton] developed ties with a number of controversial groups, like the right-wing Gatestone Institute, which some have accused of anti-Muslim bias.

You'll see the Gatestone Institute on our side-bar. For the BBC though, it seems, it's "controversial" and "right-wing" and, oh no!, "some" have accused it of "anti-Muslim bias". We'll have to remove it then. (Not).

In Praise of David Lammy MP

To be sarcastic or not to be sarcastic, that is the question....

We don't often complain about Radio 4's Profile. 

Speaking for myself (and, so, not presuming on Sue!), I find it to be generally very engaging and pretty scrupulous when it comes to questions of balance and bias.

This week's edition, however, took me by surprise - so much so that I'm now posting (and strongly moaning) about it.

*******

It profiled a prominent UK politician. 

Now, Profile often profiles politicians and, I'd say, usually succeeds in giving a fair and balanced view of them. 

Not this time though. 

*******

Seriously, O Dear Reader, please listen to it for yourselves and see if you agree with me that (this week) Profile came far, far too close to sounding like a puff piece for the politician concerned.

Even presenter Mark Coles (a very engaging presenter) dropped his trademark John Peel-style deadpan irony. 

Indeed, listening to it, I thought of it as being a radio version of one of those notoriously hagiographic Wikipedia entries which turn out to have been edited (on the sly) by the very politician in question!

*******

The politician profiled by Radio 4's Profile, if you were wondering, was Labour's David Lammy. 

Every voice featured -

his godmother Auntie May; his sister; Alastair Campbell; his school friend Patrick; his fellow choir member Kate; his former deputy head Trevor; his former Harvard professor Alan Stone; and Huff Post editor Paul Waugh 

- had only good things to say about him, and defended him against the very rare mentions of criticisms of Saint David of Tottenham featured in the programme...

...(including a fleeting mention of his, ahem, slightly embarrassing Mastermind experience).

*******

I was genuinely taken aback by this Radio 4 Profile. (Should I have been?)

I expected (from past experience) to hear at least one or two dissenting voices - (that's what Radio 4's Profile usually does as far as profiling UK party politicians goes) - but there were no dissenting voices...

...and that is very unusual for Radio 4 Profile.

*******

What got into the BBC here? Why didn't they dare to bring balance and irony into their profile of David Lammy? Why the near hagiography? Did the excellent Mark Coles cringe whilst reading out this script? What were they up to?

*******

If you think I'm in any way exaggerating, please listen for yourselves and feel free to to disagree (and I'd love to hear an attempted defence of the BBC here).

Meanwhile, in the wake of this programme, I'm off to pray at the premature shrine of Saint David of Lammy, as he makes our present saints (on the evidence of Radio 4's Profile) sound like sinners.

In which Craig becomes a Samira Ahmed-style snowflake...

Me

Today's Radio 4 Profile of Oprah Winfrey, presented by the accomplished John Peel impersonator Mark Coles (one of those people who always sounds as if they're being sarcastic even when they aren't being sarcastic), featured the following anecdote: 

Mark Coles: And there were plenty more says Sandra Pinckney, who shared a flat with Oprah Winfrey for a while. 

Sandra Pinckney: Oh my God, her dates! I mean, this one night she was going out. It was a Friday night. She said, "Sandra, when he comes don't say one word to me!", and I said, "What are you talking about?". So the doorbell rings and I'm waiting for her to answer the door. She's nowhere to be found. I answered the door  and [laughing] here's this guy. I mean, with all respect to short people, I mean, he was short and he was very funny-looking. And [laughing] so I said, "Oh! Well, come in and let me just get Oprah. She's ready. She's somewhere. Just hold on". I looked into my room, the closet, her room, the bathroom. And then I heard something in her closet. I opened the closet door [laughing] and there she is sitting in the dirty clothes hamper, hysterical, tears running down her eyes cos she knew what this guy looked like, and she knew what I was thinking.

Well, I have to say, as a short, funny-looking man myself, I found that anecdote grossly offensive and am appalled at the BBC for broadcasting it. 

I will be writing to Newswatch, Feedback and Points of View and tweeting about it endlessly for the next five years until Mark Coles, Sandra and Oprah are sent to join Toby Young in Virtual Reality Siberia. 

It's completely unacceptable.

As Samira Ahmed might say, there's surely a case to be answered that broadcasting anecdotes like this has an assault/normalising effect.

Should the next President of the United States be a heightist, appearance-obsessed bigot like Oprah - someone who can't see beyond a short man's funny face to the human being who shines like an angel behind it, and who laughs with her friends at the expense of funny-faced, short men? 

The worse-than-Carrie-Gracie-level problem here is that short, funny-looking men just don't have the social media clout of other vulnerable minority groups. We're never likely to get taken up by BBC Trending.

That won't stop me though. I'm on a mission to interfere in the next US election now. I'm like Nick Bryant, Katty Kay, Anthony Zurcher and Jon Sopel on steroids. Oprah will become the next President of the United States over my (short) dead body!

Profiles

Tonight's profile of Theresa May on Radio 4's Profile (presented by John Peel impersonator Mark Coles) was an attempt to unwrap the riddle wrapped in a mystery inside a contemporary BBC One drama plot inside an enigma that is our new PM. 

What did it 'tell' us about her (if we can trust it)?

Well, her long-term friends say she always wanted to lead her country, even from childhood. Her aim was to be Britain's first female PM, so she was "quite irritated" when Mrs Thatcher "got there first" (according to one friend). 

Her dad died in a car crash when she was 25. Her mum died a year later. She leaned on her new banker husband Philip. 

Jenni Russell of the Times said that a Number 10 source said to her, after she was appointed to David Cameron's cabinet in 2010, "Well, we don't think much of her but we had to have a token woman and she is the best of an unimpressive bunch".

Lib Dem David Laws remembers her looking "extremely nervous" when she become home secretary" - an "uncomfortable fit", he called her, "looked down upon by some of the Prime Minister's inner circle". She said she often seemed "quite a lonely figure in cabinet...not part of the [public school] club", he said. 

"Even the Prime Minister allegedly had a rude name for her", Mark said. "Her nickname about her was such that I probably shouldn't record it on a family programme", said David Laws. 

I have to say (if all this is fair) that it's getting far easier to understand why Theresa has taken such ruthless and relentless-seeming revenge against the Cameroons in the past few days! (Vengeance is mine; I will repay, saith the Lord.)

She's the longest-serving home secretary in half a century - "a remarkable achievement in itself", said Mark Coles.

But what of her record? Her defenders (including Justine Greening and Eric Pickles) defended her, and Mark Coles said that "from the start she seemed determined to be her own woman" and that "in her six years at the Home Office Theresa May certainly didn't shy away from difficult decisions".

Profile raises a few concerns, however - especially from David Laws over civil liberties = but, all in all, her record sounded very impressive here. Even her failure to reduce levels of immigration was given a positive spin, courtesy of Chris Grayling.

That said, there was something that didn't go down well with Profile. Her "hawkish" party conference speech on immigration last year "positioned her to the right of the party", according to Mark. And Jenni Russell of the Times found it "wrong" and "almost menacing". It was so "hard right" and "chilly" that the Conservative conference "completely held back". Eric Pickles denied that and said she was just being "ahead of the curve". 

"Many" see her as "a reluctant Remainer", said Mark, adding that "her critics" think she played "a clever game" by "keeping her head down". Eric Pickles admires her though and thinks she believes in Britain, social opportunity and meritocracy while David Laws is confused, calling her "very difficult to pigeonhole". 

Mark reported her Downing Street speech. People were astounded. It sound like a sermon. What did it tell us about her outlook?

Profile left that question hanging.

All in all, that was a Profile which gave Mrs May a pretty positive take. 

Last week's Profile of Andrea Leadsom, also presented by Mark Coles, was noticeably less positive.

As Mark said, early on, her CV was the focus and "we're going to put it through the wringer to see if it hold up".

Though not entirely a hatchet job, last week's Profile was pretty unambiguous in suggesting it didn't hold up, thus reinforcing the views of those critics who said, at Mark phrased it, "she's an untested lightweight who's exaggerated her City career to try to impress". 

Its tone was much drier in wit and far more sarcastic in intent that this week's episode.

We're in 'compare and contrast' territory again. And the contrast was clear.

Of course, it's perfectly possible that Andrea Leadsom wasn't up to being PM and that Theresa May (PBUH) is up to the job, and that Profile was only reflecting this.

We'll never know, of course, about the former now, but we'll certainly know in the near future about the latter.

Profiling Shane Smith

Man who likes red wine 

Radio 4's Profile doesn't just bring the personalities of its subjects alive, it also reflects the personalities of its presenters. A Profile by Edward Stourton, for example, will have a very different character to one by, say, Mark Coles.

This week's profile of VICE Media co-founder Shane Smith, for example, not only projected the hipster-businessman character of its subject but the John Peel-like warmth, dry humour and vocal inflections of its presenter, Mark Coles - plus his Peel-like love of music.

Shane Smith, a punk-loving Canadian, comes from Irish immigrant stock and has made it big in New York, and the world.

Shane...punk...Irish...New York? Shane MacGowan...The Pogues...A Fairytale of New York. Cue Pogues songs.

Mark's profile of Shane Smith projected the image of Shane that Shane clearly wants to be projected - that of the heavy-drinking/drug-taking, amoral slacker whose exceptional business acumen and 'immersionist' style of reporting wowed Generation Y and won over Rupert Murdoch. Because of Mark's dry style, however, I was left simultaneously won over by and sceptical about Shane Smith's public image. Too good/bad to be true?

The controversy over VICE getting into bed with...er, embedding with...Islamic State and going where no mainstream media outlet has gone before was aired, tending towards the view that it was - on balance - a good thing.

In contrast, the controversy over VICE getting into bed with the regime in North Korea by embedding itself with Dennis Rodman (best known as the Celebrity Big Brother friend of George Galloway and Pete Byrne of Dead or Alive "fame", apparently also a basketball player) and Kim Jong-un (best known as an obese dictator) was also aired, tending towards the view that it was, emphatically (em-fatty-cally as regards young Kim) a bad thing.

Curiously for a BBC Profile, it didn't touch on the man's political views. Shane had nothing but contempt for the Occupy movement (remember that?) and said this of European-style socialism:

I grew up being a socialist and I have problems with it because I grew up in Canada [and] I’ve spent a lot of time in Scandinavia, where I believe countries legislate out creativity. They cut off the tall trees. Everyone’s a C-minus... 

[...incidentally rather like the UK's present political class for that matter!]

That kind of politics does seem to tally with the Generation Y we in the UK know.

Why am I telling you all this on a blog supposedly about BBC bias? Either 'God knows!' or you know, as I sure as heck don't - unless the preceding few paragraphs add up to something significant about BBC bias, and, frankly, I'm getting beyond knowing whether they do or don't.