'BBC Betrayal'

'The Thunderer' thunders:

The Times view on Tiggy Legge-Bourke and Panorama: BBC Betrayal

The corporation treated Princes William and Harry’s former nanny disgracefully

That the former nanny to Princes William and Harry should have been defamed by a false rumour that she had become pregnant by Prince Charles is scandalous. That this rumour should have emanated from the BBC is appalling. And that in order to extract an apology from the corporation she has had to wait a quarter of a century and take it to court is beyond belief.

Tiggy Legge-Bourke, as she was called when she worked for the royal family, was a victim of a scheme cooked up by Martin Bashir, a BBC reporter, in 1995 to persuade Princess Diana that those around her were in league with her husband and conspiring against her. Bashir hoped this would persuade the princess to grant an interview to the BBC’s Panorama programme.

The plan involved spreading a false rumour that Ms Legge-Bourke, now known as Alexandra Pettifer, had had an abortion as a result of an affair with Prince Charles. According to a joint statement by Pettifer and the BBC, released as part of a court settlement, Princess Diana believed this rumour; not even the sharing of private medical information would persuade her it was untrue. Ms Pettifer says that her life was scarred by it. Ms Pettifer was one of many harmed by Bashir’s wicked scheme, most notably the princess and her family. Prince William said last year, when Lord Dyson’s report into the deceit and cover-up was published, “it brings indescribable sadness to know that the BBC’s failures contributed significantly to [my mother’s] fear, paranoia and isolation that I remember from those final years with her”.

Other victims included those brave enough to question Bashir’s methods. Matt Wiessler, a graphic designer who became suspicious about how his work was being used by the reporter, was never allowed to work for the BBC again. Mark Killick, a Panorama producer, was fired 24 hours after raising concerns about how Bashir had got that interview, and was subsequently defamed.

The financial cost to the BBC is considerable. It is to pay Ms Pettifer £200,000 in damages; it has paid Commander Patrick Jephson, Princess Diana’s former private secretary, £100,000, and Mr Killick £50,000; last year it agreed a settlement with Mr Wiessler worth potentially £750,000. Lord Dyson’s review cost £1.4 million, and the BBC has paid £1.5 million to a charity chosen by the royal family.

The cost to the corporation’s reputation is incalculable. At a time when the rise of streaming platforms is undermining the BBC’s economic raison d’être, one of the main justifications for its continued financing through the licence fee is a moral one. The BBC should represent, at home and to the rest of the world, the highest standards in broadcasting. In the lies told and the pain caused in the making of this programme, it has fallen far from that aspiration.

Tim Davie, the BBC’s director-general, took the opportunity of the settlement with Ms Pettifer to apologise to her, to the Prince of Wales and to William and Harry. The Panorama programme, he said, would never be screened again, in Britain or elsewhere. After many years of near-silence from the corporation’s leaders, Davie’s profuse apology is welcome, but it is not enough. The BBC has yet to come clean about who was to blame for the cover-up of Bashir’s duplicity. If it is to regain the moral authority that a public-service broadcaster should enjoy, it needs to do so now.

Where's Timmy?

Q; Is Tim Davie still there? I understood that the remit - the principal raison d’être for installing a fresh DG  was to address, (and rectify) the BBC’s bias. Or the public’s perception of the BBC’s bias.

Oh, I think I’ve answered my own question.

A; The public doesn’t have much of a perception of the BBC’s bias because where certain topics are concerned (e.g., Middle East politics) the ‘perception’ in question is largely gleaned via (Through the lens of) the BBC. A self-fulfilling, circular chicken-and-egg scenario.

(Sorry for all the parentheses.) (It’s because of  the heat)

Now, let’s begin with our old friend (Well, the BBC’s old friend) Abdel Bari Atwan. (On Dateline they like to call him ‘Barry’ - a sign of affection.  (For some reason) 

He was temporarily cancelled (allegedly) for saying some pretty nasty things while accidentally using English rather than Arabic, the language in which he expresses his real feelings about the Jews. 

As Craig mentioned, I’ve speculated about this temporary absence already. 

“Oh yes, and has anyone noted the recent absence of the BBC’s most ubiquitous guest on Dateline London recently?   One of his rants has apparently been removed from YouTube but does anyone know if his recent (semi) withdrawal from our BBC screens is a coincidence or part of Tim Davie’s nascent decontamination project? Yes, I’m talking about “Barry Atwan or ‘arry Batwan.

 

 Haven’t seen Mr Atwan lately. Did he creep away quietly, or was there a showdown? (Asking for a few million friends.)"

This is getting just like that post all over again. I seem to have just regurgitated (from the same post) the following:

This is almost unbelievable when you consider that Tim Davie was supposed to be addressing the bias. I understood that the BBC’s entire raison d’être for co-opting Tim Davie to the maelstrom  — bringing him aboard - was to iron out the bias once and for all!  But when? This year, next year, sometime never?  

Never mind. We are as repetitive as needs be. And it seems my speculation was nowt but wishful thinking. Barry hasn’t been cancelled.

Neither has our old friend (Well, the BBC’s old friend) Jeremy Bowen. One might also call him ‘friend of this blog’ in the sense that typing Jezza’s name into our search box brings up pages and pages of content. 

Nothing changes. Nothing is ever properly “addressed”. 

Jeremy Bowen is widely known for his pro-Palestinian take on everything connected with the topic. His well-documented grudge against Israel after the killing of his Palestinian driver, which came about largely because of Bowen’s recklessness. (Are there echoes of a similar recklessness in Shireen Abu Ackleh’s “wrong place at the wrong time” shooting?)

It was probably wishful thinking on my part that gave Bowen’s transfer to Ukraine a benefit-of-the doubt-like passing fancy, namely that he’s been whisked away from one (metaphorical) potential danger zone (sullying the BBC’s reputation with his dreadful bias against Israel) to another (physical) one. A fresh start with a comparatively clean slate. 

But no. He’s back, yet again in the same old danger zone, stirring up antisemitism for all he’s worth.  Tim Davie, what are you thinking?

David Collier and Hadar Sela have gone into detail about this particular report of Bowen’s. 

Ostensibly covering Joe Biden’s visit to the region, Bowen’s communiqué shamelessly manipulates language while sidestepping the actual news (The Jerusalem U.S.-Israel Strategic Partnership Joint Declaration) to reiterate what -  in his own words- “has all been said before”.

Here we are. Blatantly biased images, highly selective and misleading film clips, and the same old distortions - they’re all back - with a vengeance!

Tim Davie, are you there? Wake up! 

Of course, writing this is a complete waste of time. Take the killing of Shireen Abu Ackleh, who is fast turning into the new Mohammad al-Dura. Even the Guardian’s forced retraction, following the same breach of the Editors’ Code of Practice (importance of distinguishing between fact and opinion), couldn’t deter Bowen from boldly repeating the same violation. 

He’s becoming increasingly audacious because he knows he can get away with it. The public (new generation) 'doesn’t know any better, and it’s not hard to see the BBC’s cavalier 'free pass' to disinformation as a contributing factor to the news that antisemitism is on the rise.

I wanted to make a nod to Harry’s Place. I don’t think many (any) of the regulars over there are aware of this blog, but we’re aware of theirs. (Nods) 

“For the life of me I’ve never understood why it spends so much on him”

Talking of BBC pay, the Telegraph's Michael Deacon hit the nail on the head this week when he wrote that getting rid of Gary Lineker - thereby saving £1.35 million - would “not lose the BBC a single viewer”:

Last year, the BBC paid Lineker around £1.35 million. For the life of me I’ve never understood why it spends so much on him. I’m not saying he’s a bad presenter. On the contrary, I think he’s a very good presenter. But the BBC doesn’t actually need a very good presenter to host Match of the Day – for an extremely simple reason.

Which is that it’s football. And, let’s face it, football fans would watch the highlights of Saturday’s big games no matter who was presenting them. They’d watch them even if they were presented by Jedward, Diane Abbott or Larry, the Downing Street cat. Because it’s the goals they’re tuning in for, not the reading of the autocue.

...which is very true. 

MD also mocks DG Tim Davie for insisting that the broadcaster has shown “incredible restraint” with its wage bill. He observes, “Whenever we read about all these stupendous sums of money, it becomes hard to sympathise with complaints about the BBC’s budget being frozen.”

It certainly does.

The BBC wriggles again

A Tale of Two Tims, for the DJ Tim business has firmly dropped DG Tim in it.

The whole business is fascinating, recalling the past Bashir and Savile scandals, with one part of the BBC working with The Guardian [naturally] and firing Freedom of Information requests at another part of the BBC to find out about previous complaints about former Radio 1 DJ Tim Westwood, while that other part of the BBC was behaving in classic BBC fashion by initially stalling and refusing to confirm or deny any past complaints, and then shifting tack and saying it didn't hold information "helpful for this investigation".

And that's when Tim Davie put his foot in it, insisting:

I've asked and we've looked at our records and we've seen no evidence. If something like this were raised or anything comes up, we investigate it fully.

...which turns out to have been less than accurate. For now, seven months on from the start of it all, the BBC has admitted there have been six complaints after Tim Westwood [who worked for the BBC up until 2013].

What is wrong with them? You'd think, after Bashir and Savile - and Cliff - that they'd stop being so defensive, so obstructive, so incompetent, so shifty when faced with investigations that might damage their reputation. The impression of constant knee-jerk 'covering up' is the thing that's most damaging to their reputation, but they don't seem to be able to help themselves. 

50:50

Here's an interesting Twitter thread from someone called Marwood who identifies on his bio with William Clauston's Social Democratic Party:

Why is it you can’t move for women’s football coverage on the BBC website despite only an avg of 2K fans attending each game, Vs 40K with men’s Premier League?

You see something like Chelsea 10-0 Arsenal and think whaaatt, better check that out and then oh, double hat-trick by Sarah Smythe.

It is the political imposition of the BBC on a mission to ‘correct’ the patriarchy, and that a fair world would be same wages & attendance for men & women’s sport, which will never happen purely bc most ppl prefer the spectacle in seeing the physically best athletes compete.

Man Utd women’s sell tickets starting from £3. Avg attendance 1,891. Men’s tickets start from £98. Avg attendance 75,000. don’t know but I’m pretty sure this isn’t just sexism at play here.

The BBC’s “50:50 The Equality Project” (fwd by Tim Davie) aims to “better reflect the world around us”. They have 670 teams across the BBC using a data monitoring methodology that “monitor the number of men and women in their content to set benchmarks and track their progress”.

“In 2020, 27 Sport programmes began piloting the monitoring of their coverage of sporting events, from Premier League Football to Athletics. They are working towards equal representation of reporters, commentators, athletes and other contributors”. So there you have it.

June Sarpong - Director of Creative Diversity (salary £267,000) - “I raise up my voice - not so that I can shout, but so that those without a voice can be heard”. We are paying for this garbage.

Sarpong is part-time (3 days/wk, full time salary equiv. £445k) and her job so exhausting it leaves her free to rake in thousands more from book deals, corporate speaking events and her work as a diversity ambassador on the board of fashion firm Burberry.

In 2021 she said “there are benefits even if you come from a low income and you're white. You're never judged on your race” But her stated goal is “equal representation of reporters, commentators, athletes and other contributors”. She is de facto judging people on their race.

The 50:50 project's ambitions don't stop with the BBC. 100 outside orgs have signed up incl "public and private media, academia, public relations, law and corporations". June is "struck by 50:50’s simplicity and how it diversifies voice through something as simple as counting".

Affirmative action is now routine at the BBC, where this manifestation of identity politics is going to upset a lot of people. Kuenssberg and Andrew Marr’s replacement will come from an all-female shortlist.

The doctor is in.

 

Tim Davies’s attempts to defend the BBC from the current tsunami of BBC-bashing inadvertently highlight the unsurmountable obstacle to reform.

As a self-appointed graduate of the famous Lucy school of psychiatry, I humbly submit my diagnosis - kindly regard this as my booth.

There’s something of the Greg Dyke about Tim Davie. If that sounds like some obscure rhyming slang, it’s not that.  The intended comparison merely concerns speech patterns and body language. Left-wing body language. You don’t need actual glottal stops to convey that certain je ne sais quoi. 

What I call ‘contrived lefty’ (calculated not-posh enunciation) communicates ‘institutional lefty’. All traces of acquired ‘down with the plebs’ articulation signals red flags danger. 

That’s enough subjective, snobbish and, if you like, bitchy analysis from this doctor.

I’d rather look at various articles about the latest terrorist incident at the Beth Israel synagogue in Colleyville, Texas. 

I wondered if it was worth spending time addressing that issue on this blog at a time when all eyes are on Boris, and the media’s campaign to unseat him. Who knew that Beth Rigby was running the country? I think we all accept that the media is in the driving seat.

On first inspection, the BBC’s articles seem fairly innocuous. They merely iterate (some of) the facts. 

But 

Stephen Pollard begs to differ. “Well, he would,”  I hear you say. This is the Jewish Chronicle.

The BBC has a serious issue with Jews.

Take last night’s coverage of the Beth Israel shul siege in Texas, when a rabbi and three other Jews were taken hostage in the synagogue. Not once in its report on its flagship 10pm news did it mention antisemitism. Not once, at any point, did Ed Thomas, the BBC’s Special Correspondent, even hint that the gunman might even possibly, just perhaps, you never know, have had an issue of some kind with Jews. 

Mr Thomas began his report by asking: “What made Malik Faisal Akram leave Blackburn, the place he called home, to travel to Texas , arm himself with a gun and hold people hostage inside a synagogue?” A real mystery that, eh? I don’t know, Ed. I am really struggling to think what might have motivated him. But obviously it had nothing to do with Jews.

That’s funny. The FBI came to the same conclusion. Gotta laugh, eh? No. Not laughing.

I Am A Jewish Advocate And The Way The World Has Reacted To The Texas Synagogue Siege Is Terrifying

It's time for the non-Jewish world to actively free itself from antisemitism. If you're not Jewish and you think Jews are centring themselves in cries about media bias, you don't have a clue what it feels like to watch mainstream media serve your enemies and jeopardise your security. You have no idea the act of courage and resistance that it is to walk into a synagogue in 2022 and pray. America tells itself it's a safe place to do that. That is a lie. This could have happened at any Jewish institution in this country. Why don't more people care?

Here’s another weird thing:

The BBC has admitted to shortfalls in its initial coverage of the Colleyville siege.

More than five hours after Akram launched the siege that ended with his death, the BBC was still referring to his captives as ‘hostages’ - in speech marks.

Trivial maybe, but the cumulative effect….

Much more detail here.

In a chilling conversation with his brother in Blackburn from inside the Congregation Beth Israel synagogue in Colleyville, Malik Faisal Akram, 44, said: "I'm opening the doors for every youngster in England to enter America and f*** with them”.

Addressing fellow jihadists, he shouted: “Live your f***ing life bro, you f***ing coward. We’re coming to f***ing America. F*** them if they want to f*** with us. We’ll give them f***ing war.

It’s a bit odd that the most widely respected media organisation in the world was slow to pick this up. At first: “Probably not antisemitic, just generally deranged. You know, mentally ill.” chorused the BBC. Still, the emphasis is on Akram’s mental ‘elf, even though it’s now being grudgingly speculated that antisemitism might also be a factor.

Anti-Semitism is rife in the British Pakistani community

Last June, the Jewish Chronicle published an investigation into Urdu-language anti-Semitism on YouTube. Hundreds of hours of the vilest Jew-hatred is freely accessible on the video sharing platform, we revealed, racking up millions of views. 

In one particularly vivid clip, the Pakistani broadcaster Zaid Hamid said: “Hitler was an angel, the way he took action against Jews, the way he killed Jews.” In another, Imran Riaz Khan, a television personality with 1.6 million followers, said: “[The Jews] lobby a lot in America and have strangled America, have it totally controlled.”

Now, as your psychiatrist, I have no doubt whatsoever that Malik Faisal Akram was mentally ill. You’d have to be a bit off-colour in the brain department to travel to America from Blackburn to try to leverage the release of Aafia Siddiqui, a Pakistani neuroscientist known as “Lady al Qaeda” who was convicted of trying to kill US troops in Afghanistan. And, to be frank, he even looks distinctly unhinged in the immediate lead-up to the event. 

But, was he much more mentally ill than any other devout Muslim from Blackburn?

BBC News

I

It's good that Matt Wiessler, the designer scapegoated by the BBC in the Martin Bashir/Princess Diana Panorama scandal, has finally received compensation [some £750,000 apparently] 'from the BBC', though it appears as if every penny of it will actually be paid by the licence fee payer. 

The licence fee payer has already forked out £1.5 million for the Dyson review into the scandal, and paid out about £1.5 million to a charity chosen by the Royal Family because of the Bashir scandal, and looks set to compensate former royal nanny Tiggy Legge-Bourke over smears spread about her by Mr Bashir.

II

Meanwhile, BBC DG Tim Davie has been talking again, this time telling a leadership conference that he feels 'exhausted' by the 'pathetic' flapping of some who 'surround' him, and he doesn't want them around him. [Are they among those who have recently departed, or will be soon departing?]

Daily, we are on the front pages of the papers. You have to judge where something is serious, and it’s not necessarily what’s the biggest press headline. I might get an email now that’s genuinely a problem that hasn’t got any press. 

You don’t want to surround yourself with people who flap and generate all this, ‘Oh it’s really serious.’ It’s not. I’m exhausted by all of that and I find it slightly pathetic. Sorry if that sounds nasty. 

In public-eye jobs we’re in the middle of the so-called culture wars and navigating that in my life is huge, in terms of what’s progressive versus what’s woke. We’re constantly being dragged around on this.

I feel some sad violin music is needed for poor Tim, whilst we wonder what he means by 'navigating' in terms of 'what's progressive versus what's woke'.

 

III

Talking of which, according to The Daily Mail the BBC is running its own in-house training about 'unconscious bias', warning against 'micro-incivilities', and that kind of rubbish. 

What struck me here is that the Mail says it has been pursuing the BBC over this through FOI requests and the BBC has refused to answer them twice before being forced to reveal the information by the Information Commissioner's Office. 

Woke or otherwise, that's very BBC.

Some Sunday morning reading

I

According to The Mail on Sunday, Culture Secretary Nadine Dorries will use her conference speech to 'throw down the gauntlet to the BBC'. A source has told them:

The plan is to put the BBC on notice that its days as the voice of the Islington Left are numbered. 

Nadine appreciates that it has a global reputation for the quality of many of its programmes, but the woke-infested news output needs addressing.

We'll see. Anyhow, there's a good quote from Nadine in The Sun: 

I could almost hear the almond latte cups hitting the floor at the BBC when I got this job. 

II 

Former BBC controller of daily news programmes Gavin Allen, ousted from the BBC board in February this year, has moved on. He's now working as 'executive editor in chief' for the highly controversial Chinese tech giant Huawei. From seeing him on Newswatch many times, always sticking up for the BBC, I suspect it won't be long before he's saying that Huawei is getting everything about right. The top comment at The Mail on Sunday reads, 'No honour, no integrity. These are the sort of people that run the BBC.' 

III

I suspect many will agree with The Times's Richard Morrison about the BBC's 'sordid' Jimmy Savile drama, starring Steve Coogan:

It was the BBC that fuelled his career and gave him a nationwide, peak-time platform. And despite all the allegations, it was still protecting and projecting his “saintly eccentric” image when he died, less than ten years ago. For such a tainted organisation to be thinking about using the name of Savile once again — after all that has been revealed — to boost its ratings and generate publicity for its TV drama output beggars belief. 

I’m surprised that Coogan, a thoughtful man, has accepted this role. I’m astounded that Tim Davie, the BBC’s director-general, has approved the project, especially with all the other battles he needs to fight to safeguard the BBC’s future. He should think again.

IV

This week answered the question on everyone's lips: Whatever happened to the 'face of the BBC' in the US, Katty Kay? Well, she left the BBC to work for Ozy - a left-wing digital media outfit that sees itself as "a catalyst for change and inspiration" and which launched the #ResetAmerica campaign to amplify racial and social injustice issues and "forge a path forward". After its chief operating officer was accused of pretending to be a YouTube executive on a conference call during talks about a £30m investment from Goldman Sachs, Katty Kay quit. So the question on everyone's lips is now: Whatever will happen to the 'face of the BBC' in the US, Katty Kay, now that she's left Ozy?

Tim in the kittens' den

  

I've just caught up on the whole of Tim Davie and Richard Sharp's appearance at the Commons Culture Select Committee today.

If you missed it and want to give over 1h 20m of your life to watching it, please click here.

Various things struck me:

Firstly, just how far the BBC's tentacles reach. Four out of the very small committee of MPs attending - I counted six or seven at most [as one may have been a clerk] - declared their BBC affiliations at the start. All four had been BBC journalists in a past life, and one even publicly declared his continuing financial benefits from the BBC. [What about the others?].

Secondly, how plausible Tim Davie is. He still talks a good talk. BBC chairman Richard Sharp was less assured. And the third musketeer, Leigh Tavaziva - the BBC's chief operating officer - came across as little but a babbler of corporate-speak. 

Thirdly, how soft the committee were on the BBC - including all but one of the Tories. 

Most of the Tories were kind to the BBC. And the Clacton Conservatory MP Giles Watling, who initially declared his continuing BBC financial rewards, turned out to be especially kind to them. He cocked his head and knitted his brow in sympathy for their financial flight and 'loss of talent'. It was like eavesdropping via video on a conversation between Tim Davie and Giles from the Samaritans. 

The SNP's John Nicolson [ex-BBC] quoted two contrasting emails from members of the public, one attacking the BBC from the left and one attacking the BBC from the right, and played the 'complaints from both sides' card, like he was some defensive BBC editor on Samira's Newsnight - which is intriguing. Are the SNP feeling much warmer towards the BBC now? 

Talking of which, Billy Bragg's chum Labour MP Kevin Brennan helped John Nicolson prove his point by going after Sir Robbie Gibb and The Tories Atop the BBC over JessBrammargate. Wonder what BBC returnee Jess Brammar made of Labour's Kevin Brennan being on her side? At least she's not retweeted him yet.

Fourthly, only Julian Knight, the committee chairman, really sunk his teeth into the BBC - though oddly, despite what he said the other day about the Mail on Sunday's latest piece, he didn't go after the corporation over Martin Bashir.

Fifthly, Damian Green - the Europhile former Conservative high-up under Mrs May - kept quiet. He was one of the four former BBC people.

All in all, it was a very easy ride for Tim and Richard. So many questions that could have been asked weren't asked. They were in a den of kittens and politicians.

Poison blades in shoes and BBC gossip

 

Thank you for your comments on the Open Thread. You've covered - and nailed - so much of the ground I would have covered, including the departure of BBC lifer Fran Unsworth.

Today's Sunday Times - featuring that photo of Ms Unsworth which always draws Rosa Klebb comparisons in comments fields - includes lots of BBC insider gossip, including claims that Tim Davie is glad to see her go because she's “stuck in her ways” and part of the “malaise” at the corporation.

Friends of Tim also give us some juicy quotes, including saying that he's engaged in “constant fire-fighting” and that “he feels he opens Pandora’s box every day, and only the bad stuff ever comes out”. 

As far as the general exodus of BBC lifers go, any BBC source quips “More people are leaving the BBC than Afghanistan.”

And who's going to replace Francesca as Director of News and Current Affairs at SPECTRE the BBC? 

The piece names four people: present Deputy director of news Jonathan Munro, Senior controller of news output and commissioning Jamie Angus, Digital director of BBC News Naja Nielsen, and Commissioning editor for factual and arts at Channel 4 Shaminder Nahal. 

Mr Munro has 'issues' involving the debacles over Cliff Richard and Martin Bashir while Mr Angus is considered “lightweight”. Cue two more insider gossip quotes:

On Jamie Angus: “He’s a dilettante. When he was at the World Service, and your job is to know this stuff, I remember him saying he hadn’t heard of Waziristan, which was where bin Laden was hiding at the time.”

On Jamie Angus and Jonathan Munro: “Angus is a man who has risen without trace and Munro is a man who should have sunk without trace”.

Ms Nielsen is a recent arrival from Danish broadcasting, and “relatively unknown.” while Ms Nahal has all the baggage of being associated with left-wing Channel 4 and was jointly responsible for Black to Front, the channel's recent racist day when only black people appeared on the channel. “We were tired of taking small steps, say Vivienne Molokwu and Shaminder Nahal”, Broadcast reported her saying two days ago.

Especially as she previously worked for Newsnight, I'd place my money on Ms Nahal.

A nest of singing birds

 

The Atticus column in The Sunday Times brings news of a revealing (if unsurprising) email:

PM and Beeb coo in harmony

Much has been said about Boris Johnson’s war on the BBC, with threats to decriminalise non-payment of the licence fee and appoint critics to prominent positions. But its current leadership appears to think relations are just fine.

Atticus has obtained an email from Tim Davie, the Beeb’s director-general, to David Clementi, then chairman, shortly after the former met the PM in the Commons last September.

His verdict: “It was friendly,” he cooed. “We landed a few points on the importance of the BBC in Covid etc. They outlined some of their thoughts on key messages.”

Davie, 53, added: “At the end, the PM volunteered that we should meet again soon to catch up more generally on the BBC.” A nest of singing birds, then.

The BBC's bread magnet comes unstuck

 

Two critics of Nish Kumar

The Independent quotes Nish Kumar's reaction to the BBC's cancellation of his The Mash Report:

Responding to the news on Twitter, Kumar wrote: “A lot of people are asking me for a comment and here it is” – accompanied with an image of himself on the show pointing to a screen that reads: “Boris Johnson is a liar and a racist.”

Of course, Boris Johnson isn't a racist.

The Independent also quotes James O'Brien, the ex-Newsnight presenter, complaining:

The Mash Report, a comedy program critical of the government has been axed by the state broadcaster, reportedly for political reasons, and at the behest of a director general appointed by the government.

Of course, Tim Davie wasn't appointed by the government. JO'B is confusing the BBC director general with the BBC chairman. The BBC chairman is appointed by the government. The BBC director general is a BBC appointment made by the BBC board, and they appointed a BBC insider. 

In the present world of spreading emojis: James O'Brien = 🤡.

Friday chat

Here's a discussion of the kind I've not had at work today, but it's interesting for featuring Prof Matthew Goodwin and The Economist editor/BBC presenter Anne McElvoy talking about Tim Davie's 'very BBC'-sounding diversity plans and how they start to fall short of what's really needed (as does this conversation):

Press Gazette: BBC director-general Tim Davie says boosting workforce diversity is "mission critical" and that there will be a "rewiring of the core" at the BBC. "Bold" targets are 50/50 gender split, 20% BAME and 12% disabled representation. 

Professor Matthew Goodwin: No mention of education or class? 34% of BBC leaders who shape coverage of news & current affairs were privately educated, 60% have parents with degrees & 69% have parents who belonged to the higher managerial & professional elite.

Anne McElvoy: The education point is a bit harder as it needs highly qualified journalists. But amazed by the complacency about a huge skew towards privately educated in news-current affairs. Think I’m right in saying BBC Radio 4's Today for one doesn’t have a single presenter who wasn’t!

Professor Matthew Goodwin: Dear me that needs to change! And on education sure but could draw from much wider pool i.e. not Oxbridge. Might be a decent reply to the Brexit moment. 

Anne McElvoy: Yes up to a point but I think there’s also a double standard in which we want to encourage a high level of aspiration from state schools – and then start complaining about too much Oxbridge/Russell Group. Course I am biased on this being state school and the dreaded Oxbridge. 

Saturday update: The conversation flows on:

Professor Matthew Goodwin: I thought it was a joke but having just done the research for my book it turns out it's true. Every single presenter on Radio 4 Today is privately-educated and Oxbridge/LSE. Only the announcer, Zeb Soanes, is not.  

Anne McElvoy: No I wasn’t joking.  

Professor Matthew Goodwin: I'm quite staggered, actually. I mean I thought post-Brexit and 2010s there might have been more reflection about the need to shake-up the conversation.

From today's papers...

Though regarding BBC Radio 4's afternoon plays as "vital" for our national culture, especially in a time of lockdown, that doyenne of radio critics Gillian Reynolds, writing in The Sunday Times today, admits that "plays that don't preach, accuse or induce guilt" are "hard to find" some days. 

"Radio 4's afternoon drama often sounds as if it's coming from a pulpit", she writes. "Race, class, gender: You will find lectures on them all here."

*******

The Mail on Sunday reports that Jeremy Clarkson has turned down new DG's Tim Davie appeal for him to return to the BBC, accusing the BBC of no longer being interested in broadcasting a variety of views, and freezing out presenters who failed to be politically correct:

Jeremy Clarkson: He [Tim Davie] was saying the other day, 'Oh, come home'. But the truth is, you'd struggle on the BBC now. It's so unbelievably right on. You just couldn't say anything which I make my living from saying.

How intriguing that Tim Davie tried to bring Jeremy Clarkson back to the BBC though! At least someone at the BBC doesn't want to freeze him out.

*******

The Martin Bashir affair is getting a lot of coverage in the papers this weekend. Accusations of a cover-up by the BBC over how Mr Bashir obtained his interview with Princess Diana are deepening. Lords Hall and Birt have been now dragged into it. It's still a remarkable thing that Martin Bashir was brought back in from the cold again by the BBC in 2016 and made, of all things, the corporation's Religion editor. 

Over to Tim

My friend David Keighley from News-watch has posted a fabulous open letter to the BBC's DG Tim Davie today at The Conservative Woman. 

It's spot-on, and I hope Mr Davie reads it and invites News-watch to discuss it - something none of his predecessors has ever deigned to do. 

I would be pleased with Tim if he does. (My breath isn't being held though).

News-watch's latest report, investigating a week's worth of BBC coverage - and if the BBC accepts a week's worth of monitoring from Cardiff University, why not accept this too? - found that, Covid notwithstanding, and us leaving the EU earlier this year notwithstanding, the BBC continues to pursue 'Project Fear' and to favour, by a large margin, voices hostile to Brexit above voices supportive of it. 

(Same as it ever was! Same as it ever was! Same as it ever was! Same as it ever was! Same as it ever was! Same as it ever was! Same as it ever was!)

One recommendation struck me as particularly timely:

Ditch opinion polls as a way of determining whether BBC output is impartial and get properly in touch with real people out there north of Watford and west of Oxford who will tell you what needs changing.

Given how poorly the pollsters did with the US election (and I imagine them collectively crying, "My God, what have I done!") the BBC's reliance on polls - and it really is their main defence - must be looking especially shaky. 

Tim Davie at the Royal Television Society, yeah?

 

Here's Tim Davie at the Royal Television Society, talking a good talk again. And saying 'Yeah?' a lot, yeah?

The Times gives us the following headline based on it:

The paper picks out three quotes:

• “The BBC does not deliver equally to everyone.” 
• “There are some people who are getting extraordinary value from the BBC...but there are certain bits of the country that don’t necessarily feel the BBC is for them. It’s not as simple as saying under-35s - it’s often about your life circumstances, where you are, where you live.”
• “I do think there’s something about metropolitan-based organisations, or the way you hire, that can feel a bit different from some of the population. It’s not left and right, it’s more complicated than that. It’s whether you feel it [the BBC] is for me.”

I'd say those quotes make the interview sound more dramatic than it is. Most of it paints a rosy picture of the BBC and there's plenty of BBC management-speak in there, yeah?

A five year plan for Gary Lineker

 

So Gary Lineker has signed a new five year deal with the BBC. 

But, as well as taking a pay cut, he will have to adhere to BBC impartiality rules as part of that deal.

Tim Davie clearly realised that he had to do something about Gary Lineker. Leaving him out of his declared crackdown on social media use drew a lot of flak and risked making him look weak, especially after Gary seemed to be mocking him over it. So he appears to have closed that loophole. 

Mr Davie has now said that that Gary "knows he has a responsibility to the BBC in terms of social media". 

The question is, will Gary stick to his side of the deal, and what will happen if he doesn't?

I'm already seeing some scepticism. BBC home affairs correspondent Daniel Sandford, for example, tweeted this in response:

So Gary Lineker has taken a pay cut. And is supposed to more careful about his social media use. Still managed to mention grouse shooting today though!

That came after Gary tweeted this earlier this morning:

Lovely day to mingle and murder some grouses.

Sorry Tim, but I think it's going to be a long and winding road with Gary. He loves his Twitter.

😕

Update: So much for that then, apparently! 

Replying to a tweet from the Guardian saying that he'd agreed to tweet more carefully, Gary Lineker has now tweeted:

Not true, but hey-ho. BBC recognise that I tweet carefully and will continue to do so.

So, why are all these media outlets reporting otherwise? Have they got the story wrong? Is it to be business as usual with Gary Lineker and Twitter?

You know it makes sense

 

The news that Andrew Neil looks set to return to the BBC with an enhanced role, with Tim Davie highlighting his importance by talking to him on Zoom on his second day in the job, is a good sign. 

Mr Davie's prompt call stands in marked contrast to the previous BBC regime which, according to the Daily Telegraph, didn't contact him even once after his programme was taken off air. 

The downside, of course, is that Andrew might have to tone down his barbed remarks about the Corporation again.

A constructive suggestion: How about moving Newsnight to 8pm and replacing Emily Maitlis with Andrew Neil? 

And why not lure back Giles Dilnot in place of Lewis Goodall too?

In with the new, out with the old

So, just a few days in, Tim Davie is apparently going to:

(a) Stop BBC stars from engaging in lucrative but potentially impartiality-busting moonlighting (in the light of recent controversies over the out of office activities of Naga Munchetty, Jon Sopel, etc);

(b) Crack down on impartiality-busting activity on social media ("If you want to be an opinionated columnist or a partisan campaigner on social media then that is a valid choice, but you should not be working at the BBC");

(c) Reduce the one-sided political partisanship of so much BBC comedy, maybe getting rid of the worst-offending shows; 

(e) Shift the focus away from London to the whole UK ("from Cornwall to Shetland, from Suffolk to County Fermanagh");

(f) Seek "a wider spectrum of views";

(g) Try to stop hiring just 'BBC types' "from out own image";

and

(g) Have Rule, Britannia! and Land of Hope and Glory sung at The Proms after all. 

This is striking stuff. And a rebuke to the old regime that allowed things to deteriorate so badly. 

I'm liking it. Maybe he is the very model of a modern director-general. 

But...he's rightly receiving a cautious welcome. 

Most of those, however grudgingly, praising him for 'talking a good talk' are understandably waiting to see if the second part of that cliché  - the bit about 'walking the walk' - ever happens. 

He's a BBC insider, of course, and he might go native even quicker for already being 'a native'. 

Others, of course, are wondering if (and some hoping that) it's far too late anyhow.

*******

I've been reading lots of people in the papers saying nice things about Lord Hall, particularly about how nice he is. 

But the state the BBC now finds itself in is something he must bear ultimate responsibility for - including agreeing to fund over 75s' licence fees as part of a deal with the government and then welching on that deal. 

And the pandering to the 'woke' brigade in recent months (overruling his own editorial director David Jordan on at least two occasions) has been especially damaging. 

My pet theory for that is that Lord was thinking of himself and his own future as a highly-remunerated arts supremo and playing to the 'ultra-woke' arts gallery. 

It sounds as if Tim Davie forced Lord Hall into an emergency compromise at the Last Night of the Proms - having orchestral versions of Rule, Britannia! and Land of Hope and Glory rather than dropping them altogether - but now Lord Hall's gone to his next plum job at the National Gallery Mr Davie has squashed that compromise and is having them sung after all - along with Jerusalem.

The new DG of the BBC

So they went for an 'insider'. Tim Davie is the new Director-General of the BBC.

The reactions on Twitter are intriguing. Some of the people on the Right I usually see criticising the BBC are being strongly positive about him - unlike the BBC's left-wing critics, who most definitely aren't.

He's not someone I know much about. He's never earned his a 'label' on our blog, so hasn't done anything 'naughty'.

I'm now reading that he's a former deputy-chair of Hammersmith & Fulham Conservative Party, so that probably accounts for why the Left aren't welcoming him with open arms.

Other black marks against him, I read, are that he went to a private school and then to Cambridge, has a commercial background (Proctor & Gamble and Pepsi) and has no background in journalism (even at the BBC, despite being head of radio, then BBC World, then BBC studios).

And who'd have thought it? He's a white, middle-aged man too.

All eyes will be on him. I wish him well.