Editorial Standards Findings Appeals and other editorial issues to the Trust considered by the Editorial Standards Committee November 2009 issued December 2009 Getting the best out of the BBC for licence fee payers Editorial Standards Findings/Appeals and other editorial issues to the Trust considered byContents the Editorial Standards Committee Remit of the Editorial Standards Committee 1 Summary of findings 3 Findings 22 Sunday, BBC Radio 4, 10 May 2009 22 News at Six, BBC One, 22 April 2009 30 Apparitions, BBC One, 13 November 2008 44 “BNP looks for cracks in the Potteries”, BBC Online 49 BBC News at Ten, 12 November 2008 55 “Karadzic's Broken Bosnia remains”, BBC Online 64 Horizon: Jimmy’s GM Food Fight, BBC Two, 25 November 2008 70 PM, BBC Radio 4, 10 February 2009 86 Panorama: Gaza Out of the Ruins, BBC One, 9 February 2009 95 The Birth of Israel, BBC Two, 4 May 2008 128 Complaints handling 154 Complaint A 154 Complaint B 155 Rejected appeals 157 BBC Natural History Unit’s (NHU) coverage of climate change issues 157 November 2009 issued December 2009 Editorial Standards Findings/Appeals and other editorial issues to the Trust considered by the Editorial Standards Committee Remit of the Editorial Standards Committee The Editorial Standards Committee (ESC) is responsible for assisting the Trust in securing editorial standards. It has a number of responsibilities, set out in its Terms of Reference at bbc.co.uk/bbctrust/about/meetings_and_minutes/bbc_trust_committees.html. The Committee comprises six Trustees: Richard Tait (Chairman), Chitra Bharucha, Mehmuda Mian, David Liddiment, Alison Hastings and Anthony Fry. It is advised and supported by the Trust Unit. In line with the ESC’s responsibility for monitoring the effectiveness of handling editorial complaints by BBC management, the Committee considers appeals against the decisions and actions of the BBC’s Editorial Complaints Unit (ECU) or of a BBC Director with responsibility for the BBC’s output (if the editorial complaint falls outside the remit of the ECU). The Committee will consider appeals concerning complaints which allege that: • the complainant has suffered unfair treatment either in a transmitted programme or item, or in the process of making the programme or item • the complainant’s privacy has been unjustifiably infringed, either in a transmitted programme or item, or in the process of making the programme or item • there has otherwise been a failure to observe required editorial standards The Committee will aim to reach a final decision on an appeal within 16 weeks of receiving the request. The findings for all appeals accepted by the Committee are reported in this bulletin, Editorial Complaints: Appeals to the Trust. As set out in its Terms of Reference, the Committee can decline to consider an appeal which in its opinion: • is vexatious or trivial; • does not raise a matter of substance; • relates to the content of a programme or item which has not yet been broadcast; • concerns issues of bias by omission in BBC news programmes unless the Chairman believes that it is plausible that the omission of an item could have led to a breach of the guidelines on impartiality; • has not been made within four weeks of the final correspondence with the ECU or BBC Director on the original complaint; and • relates to matters which are the subject of or likely to be the subject of, or relevant to, legal proceedings. The Committee will not generally reconsider any aspects of complaints that have already been adjudicated upon or considered by a Court. Any appeals that the Committee has declined to consider under the above criteria are reported in the bulletin. November 2009 issued December 2009 1 Editorial Standards Findings/Appeals and other editorial issues to the Trust considered by the Editorial Standards Committee In line with its duty to consider topics of editorial concern to the Committee, whether or not such concern arises from a formal complaint, and to commission information requests from the Trust Unit or Executive to support such consideration, the Committee also from time to time requests the Executive to report to the Committee regarding breaches which have been accepted by the Executive and are therefore not subject to appeal to the Committee. The bulletin also may contain findings relating to such cases. The bulletin also includes any remedial action/s directed by the Committee. It is published at bbc.co.uk/bbctrust or is available from: The Secretary, Editorial Standards Committee BBC Trust Unit 180 Great Portland Street London W1W 5QZ November 2009 issued December 2009 2 Editorial Standards Findings/Appeals and other editorial issues to the Trust considered by the Editorial Standards Committee Summary of findings Sunday, BBC Radio 4, 10 May 2009 In an interview with the Latin Patriarch of Jerusalem about the Pope’s forthcoming visit to Israel, Jerusalem and the West Bank the presenter twice used the term “Palestinian territories”. The complainant said that this term was inaccurate as the territories are occupied and should be described as such. The complainant suggested that the term “Palestinian territories” was a neutral one for what everyone would consider to be an occupation. The complainant also suggested that the issue of impartiality should be considered as it was “germane to consider who benefits by airbrushing out the fact of occupation”. The Committee concluded: Accuracy • that the advisory notes for BBC journalists were not part of the BBC’s Editorial Guidelines and any departure from this advice would not automatically constitute a breach of the BBC’s Editorial Guidelines; • that context was a vital factor in any consideration of the use of disputed language; • that, given the context of the discussion was religion and not politics, it was not necessary to include the word “occupied” in the shorthand description of the area under discussion; • that the phrase had been accurately used within the context of this programme; • that there was no breach of the accuracy guidelines; Impartiality • that the use of what the complainant described as a “neutral” term did not indicate bias and that the audience would not have been misled by it; and • that there was no breach of the impartiality guidelines. The complaint was not upheld. For the finding in full see pages 22 to 29. News at Six, BBC One, 22 April 2009 The complaint was that coverage of the Government’s Budget statement focused on the negative aspects without setting them in the context of the wider financial crisis, and that there was almost no mention of the “good news” contained in the Budget statement. The complainant stated that the Budget coverage was “more like a Conservative party political broadcast than the even-handed presentation of a vital news story required under the BBC editorial guidelines”. He made a number of specific points to back up his overall criticism. The Committee concluded: November 2009 issued December 2009 3 Editorial Standards Findings/Appeals and other editorial issues to the Trust considered by the Editorial Standards Committee • that it agreed with the ECU’s decision at stage 2 of the complaints process that it might have been better to have given more context regarding the global recession; • that, notwithstanding the above, the Committee was satisfied that the public was in no doubt of the seriousness of the economic crisis at the time; • that the BBC had covered the financial crisis extensively in the run-up to the Budget, and that there had been reference to it in the News at Six’s Budget coverage; • that it had been appropriate to use a clip of the leader of the opposition given that the Government’s position as to the strength of the economy had been expressed within the bulletin; • that the forecasts of other bodies were irrelevant in the context of a report on the Government’s budget, where what was in question was its own forecast set against previous predictions by the Chancellor; • that the programme had appropriately explored the Government’s predictions on borrowing and the scale of the recession; • that the fact that the Government had broken its tax promise had been reported accurately; • that the rise in taxation had been reported objectively, with the programme stating that there was public support for a tax rise and that “events dictated what he [the Chancellor] needed to do”; • that it had been wholly proper for the programme to have included clips of the Prime Minister speaking in the past about the boom and bust cycle; • that there was no requirement for the clips to have been additionally contextualized; • that it was not necessary for an item about the biggest rise in the unemployment figures for 18 years to mention that this rise had not been as large as some may have forecast; • that there was no requirement for the news editor to include all of the Government’s measures outlined in the Budget statement, and that bias could not be inferred from the omission of some these measures; • that the Government’s scrappage scheme had been covered in a balanced way; • that it agreed with the ECU’s view that all sides had accepted that the debt and borrowing figures had been catastrophic and so the coverage of these did not require the same kind of balancing comments; and • that the programme’s coverage as a whole had been factual, appropriate and duly impartial. The complaint was not upheld. For the finding in full see pages 30 to 43. Apparitions, BBC One, 13 November 2008 November 2009 issued December 2009 4 Editorial Standards Findings/Appeals and other editorial issues to the Trust considered by the Editorial Standards Committee The complainant said that the drama, which included a scene in which a homosexual priest was flayed to death by demons, linked homosexuality with evil and propagated “religious bigotry and fanaticism”.