Following the debacle over the pulling of their report on Jimmy Savile last December, the programme's joint investigation with the Bureau of Investigative Journalism (TBIJ) into abuse in North Wales, broadcast last Friday (2/11/2012), wrongly accused 'a senior Conservative figure from the Thatcher era' of child abuse. The programme itself didn't name him at the time, despite an ill-judged tweet from TBIJ leading viewers to expect that it would. Despite that, the damage to the lord's reputation was done. The identity of the wrongly-accused 'senior Conservative figure from the Thatcher era' began to 'go viral' across the Twitterverse, becoming widely-known as a result. The programme itself had left enough clues to lead people in that direction, so go in that direction people went. The gossip turned out to be all wrong. It was a case of mistaken identity. The accuser realised his mistake and 'fessed up (and says it was the police who are guilty of getting him to identify the wrong man). Newsnight has unreservedly apologised, the 'senior Conservative figure from the Thatcher era' is now taking legal action on several fronts and the BBC has been sent reeling.
There do seem to be a lot of questions that need answering. Some are for the top management of the BBC, and the Director General has been touring BBC studios today, being pounded left, right and centre by his own presenters.
What though of the questions for Newsnight? Steve Hewlett of the Guardian and BBC Radio 4's Media Show, the BBC's go-to man for media issues, has been sharply critical of the programme, claiming the BBC had looked into the accuser and his accusations on at least two separate occasions "and found them wanting". Another question for Newsnight - and TBIJ - arises from the fact that, by all accounts, the accuser was only shown a photograph of the wrongly-accused man yesterday - one week after the report was broadcast - and only then realised his mistake. Why on earth wasn't he shown that photograph earlier? It also emerged yesterday that the BBC had chosen not to contact the wrongly-accused man for a right of reply on the Friday of last week. Why? Because, it says, it didn't actually name him in the Newsnight film. Unfortunately, that answer is begging even more questions. (The Reynolds Defence comes into play here, apparently).
So how did it happen? There's much speculation going on (ironically, given what happened last week), but these seem to be the most popular contenders for an explanation:
- REDEMPTION. Did it arise because Newsnight wanted to make amends for its failure to broadcast the report into Savile's child abuse last year, doing something that showed that it cared about the issue and that it could still do proper investigative journalism?
- DIVERSION. Did it arise as some sort of diversionary tactic, designed to take the public's eye off child abuse focused specifically on the BBC and shift it instead onto child abuse more generally?
- BIAS. Did Newsnight seize at the chance to shift an abuse story onto a Top Tory for a specific reason, or was that just a co-incidence? If it did try to shift it onto the Tories deliberately, why? To put the Tory-led government on the back foot over the ongoing scandal at the BBC (quiet them up?), or to have a partisan jab at the Tories, and smear Mrs Thatcher for good measure?
- REDEMPTION. Did it arise because Newsnight wanted to make amends for its failure to broadcast the report into Savile's child abuse last year, doing something that showed that it cared about the issue and that it could still do proper investigative journalism?
- DIVERSION. Did it arise as some sort of diversionary tactic, designed to take the public's eye off child abuse focused specifically on the BBC and shift it instead onto child abuse more generally?
- BIAS. Did Newsnight seize at the chance to shift an abuse story onto a Top Tory for a specific reason, or was that just a co-incidence? If it did try to shift it onto the Tories deliberately, why? To put the Tory-led government on the back foot over the ongoing scandal at the BBC (quiet them up?), or to have a partisan jab at the Tories, and smear Mrs Thatcher for good measure?
