BBC expected to apologise for doctoring Trump videos

No Elegran but shall have a look.

ronib

Another irony - the UK isn’t . 2025

As the programme under discussion wasn't 'news', but about an episode that was very big news nearly 5 years ago and there was, at the time, apparent universal agreement as to Trump's intentions at the time I completely fail to see how there was any 'fake news' involved.

I would add that I am completely indifferent to Gnetters' opinions of my stance on the whole episode.

The events surrounding one Andrew MW were allegedly 21 years ago and yet every detail is being revealed and played out as if happened yesterday.
So 5 years ago seems to be a bit better than 21 years ago? Also the concept of apparent universal agreement does seem to be quite a quirky thing. And as you so rightly say MaizieDyou are indifferent…. As indeed you should be! I am too.

Oreo

I think he’ll be satisfied with an apology in the end, which he’s entitled to.
Wyllow3 You’re trying ever so hard to brush things under the carpet, you’re not Mrs Davie by any chance?🤔
It wasn’t trivial and it wasn’t a mistake and there are other issues of bias.
Yes it’s good that the top twosome have resigned as they have overall responsibility for the corporation but the new Heads have to make sure there are changes.

I agree it wasnt trivial or a mistake

ronib

The events surrounding one Andrew MW were allegedly 21 years ago and yet every detail is being revealed and played out as if happened yesterday.
So 5 years ago seems to be a bit better than 21 years ago? Also the concept of apparent universal agreement does seem to be quite a quirky thing. And as you so rightly say MaizieDyou are indifferent…. As indeed you should be! I am too.

I sometimes have no idea what you mean ronib. Contemporaneous records don’t date.

Casdon - I’m with you in often being unable to understand ronib’s point

I’m entertained by your support from AMW and Mr Trump rather than the bbc ronib 🙈

Glad to hear that … made my day! Iam64.

Message deleted by Gransnet. Here's a link to our Talk guidelines.

Likewise

I am another GN, fancy, who believes that Trump's standard of behaviour is very low.

Galaxy Thu 13-Nov-25 12:07:32
"These are some of the appointments made at the BBC in the past.
Gavyn Davies - labour donor and advisor - chaired BBC board of governors
Greg Dyke - labour donor - became director general
Michael lyons - ex labour council leader - chaired BBC trust
James Purnell - ex labour mp became director of strategy and digital at the BBC.
There have always been high level appointments at the BBC that have a particular political viewpoint, that is in my view absolutely fine. However if it isn't fine for Gibb it can't be fine for the rest of them".

Thanks for this post Galaxy- helpful and particularly topical today in light of Lisa Nandy's announcement. MPs and other have called for Gibb's removal from the BBC board and the biggest union in the bBC has written to Nandy "We simply do not see how staff can have faith in the BBC's leadership while a crucial position on the board is filled by someone perceived to be by many staff and external commentators as being sympathetic to, or actively part of a campaign to undermine the BBC and influence its political impartiality".

The BBC roles of Gavyn Davies (resigned 2004, Get Dyke, left 2004, Michael Lyons became Chair 2007, were appointed when Labour was in government. Since the Conservatives came into power in May 2010, up until July 2024, all BBC board appointments after these three individuals, were made under the Conservative government's political involvement, as set out in the BBC Charter. James Parnell was appointed under a Conservative government, but was told he needed to resign his Labour membership on appointment. The Telegraph described Parnell's BBC role "as a key facet to attract younger listeners and viewers to the bBC" - he did not have a board role.

One thing we all seem to agree on is that the BBC, as an independent broadcaster, should be editorially and politically impartial and not politically biased. Nandy said today, when asked about GIBB, that the review of the BBC's charter will examine such political appointments as they have "damaged confidence and trust in the BBC's impartiality".

I think this is a positive step- do others agree?"

Yes I do agree. It is clear that a Gibb has been far too meddling with his own agenda.

Maybe it’s time for the BBC main appointments not to be political.

Could be difficult as we all have political allegiances which determine our decisions.

GrannyGravy13

Maybe it’s time for the BBC main appointments not to be political.

Could be difficult as we all have political allegiances which determine our decisions.

I think it's definitely time. It gives too much patronage to PMs.

I agree MaizieD- time to remove political patronage from the government of the day.

We simply do not see how staff can have faith in the BBC's leadership while a crucial position on the board is filled by someone perceived to be by many staff and external commentators as being sympathetic to, or actively part of a campaign to undermine the BBC and influence its political impartiality.

I take exception to this. It is the BBC which has undermined its reputation for impartiality, not Sir Robbie Gibb. The report written by Michael Prescott has raised the issue of the lack of impartiality in the presentation of some news items, and in particular the altering of the sequence of Donald Trump's speech. The failure to address this has brought the BBC into disrepute and laid it open to litigation.

It is beautifully illustrating the problem.

Galaxy

It is beautifully illustrating the problem.

What is illustrating what problem?

Their concerns about the impartiality of gibb and their theory that it us all a right wing conspiracy. Honestly in my view if they go down that route it will be the end of them.

Who are ‘they’, Galaxy?

These gnomic offerings of yours do take a lot of unpicking…

I gather that the latest news is that Trump has not accepted the apology and he is going to go ahead and issue proceedings to sue the BBC for $1bn. The trial will take place in Florida.

The BBC should simply tell him that they’ll see him in court.

The BBC and to an extent its supporters. It does demonstrate the bias that exists within it. There are a few within the BBC acknowledging the issues I hope they are the stronger voice.
If your default reaction is ' right wing conspiracy' ( without even acknowledging the 'non right' who are raising concerns) then it won't end well.

Ladyleftfieldlover

The BBC should simply tell him that they’ll see him in court.

Exactly. It's all smoke and mirrors anyway. The funniest thing today is him going ape at Marjorie Taylor Green. Reminds me of Spy on Spy from Mad Magazine back in the old days. I am astounded that any truly patriotic British person could side with Trump quite frankly. So many rabbit holes have been gone down by so many.

The fact that it is only the Trump issue that is being discussed is also telling, this is a report that covers a wide wide range of issues. But of course Trump is the easy one because in the eyes of the BBC and its supporters Trump = bad, there is therefore no need to worry about their own behaviour.