BBC expected to apologise for doctoring Trump videos

The BBC has a charter.

It should follow the principles of the Charter.

What other news outlets do isn’t relevant. nor whether something the BBC broadcast was made by an independent company.

Back to basics.

BBC have a responsibility to ensure that anything they broadcast is accurate. Theirs is the name on the tin

Several times lately it hasn’t been, including the Panorama episode.

Whitewavemark2

It was screened 3? Years ago.

Yes, hence the manufactured outrage now is obviously a part of a wider move to destroy our BBC. And too many are falling for it.

Oreo

IOMGran

So when will GB News be under the spotlight? Answers on a postcard Oreo. Like when Hell freezes over?

How should I know? Why be so aggressive? When they break guidelines I suppose.

I have already told you that Ofcom don't regard them as a News channel but an entertainment channel, despite them badges themselves as GB 'News'. Ofcom are useless as this enables GBNews to not be subject to the same guidelines and rules as the BBC is held to. It's not aggression, it's frustration with the fact that no one seems to be interested in these facts.

Whitewavemark2

Trump has threatened to sue ABC, CBS and the BBC amongst others.

It is what authoritarian leaders do to control information.

I have no doubt that the BBC will retract the panorama programme, and hopefully avoid a £1billion bill.

However, we must not allow a foreign leader to control our media output. Appeasement doesn’t sit well.

This $1 billion lawsuit is smoke and mirrors, it should be treated as such. It's just typical bullyboy tactics from the orange creep. Anyone who backs this foreigner against our own state is a traitor, simple as. They should leave and live in the USA.

I’ve been wondering when Trump and his supporters would turn the eye of Sauron to the BBC. I hear it was an independent production company that made the programme and it is unfortunate that the edit was allowed to go out - but this is all about the far right and their political agenda. Tbh Trump’s speech and his behaviour needs no editing.
The BBC is a fantastic organisation - one of the last bastions of any attempt to report the facts and investigate injustice. Mistakes happen and this needs to be addressed but that is for the BBC to deal with. I remember when Nadine Dorris was culture secretary - she wanted to end the BBC too. She’s now joined Reform.
In the states the Washington Post uncovered Watergate in the 70’s - and wasn’t afraid to challenge the most senior politicians of the day - but today it’s owned by Jeff Bezos - so that’s all changed.
We need the BBC - it’s a great British and national treasure.

Probably that is why people turn to social media-

Quote Mamie Tue 11-Nov-25 07:08:45
Anniebach
The BBC cannot be relied of for truths

In which case, who do you think can be relied on for the truth Anniebach?

Thinking how we are fed lies daily Mamie I doubt anyone

Anniebach

The BBC cannot be relied of for truths

In which case, who do you think can be relied on for the truth Anniebach?

It is a fact that the BBC has a liberal, leftist editorial policy, many on GN obviously agree with that. They do not just report the news they dramatize it and distort the facts just like they did with Trumps speech.
The BBC is very powerful we hear their view on political topics every day and it does influence society and attitudes, maybe that’s why so many are dissatisfied with UK today.

The BBC cannot be relied of for truths

Whitewavemark2

I re- watched the BBC edited speech by Trump.

I watched the whole of January 6th live, at the time, and the message I took from Trumps speech on the day, was exactly the same as the edited BBC piece, as did the murderous mob who caused mayhem and insurrection as Trumps behest.

All media from tv, radio to all newspapers edit. It’s what they do. At the time it was not questioned although people would be aware of the edit.

It was the message that was important in this instant which was “fight like hell”

It was shocking at the time and continues to be so, however much push back from the Trump supporters. History cannot easily be re-written, when it is so shocking as Jan 6th

Exactly

Panorama isn’t BBCNews though is it?

MaizieD- The BBC has apologised and taken accountability today for its “editing error” but I agree with you that the programme was actually made by an independent production company- so will rephrase “there is no doubt the BBC broadcasted the 70 minute speech as edited”.

Primrose53- I’m interested in your assertion that the BBC “only invite people who share their views” do you have any supportive evidence?

Primrose53

LemonJam

Yes have watched GB news Primrose53.

Good. Then you will know that they have a very wide range of guests and everybody gets a fair crack of the whip. The BBC only invite people who share their views. They report on people they don’t like and make digs at them but never invite them on. The BBC has always been biased and now it’s clear for all to see and without doubt.

I'm afraid that your claims about the BBC are not in the least bit convincing, Primrose. For example, I would suspect that a great many BBC personnel detest Farage, but he's trotted out by the BBC with wearying regularity.

With regard to GB News you are confusing popularity with probity.

There is no doubt that The BBC edited the 70 minute speech in question

That is not true. The BBC didn't have anything to do with the editing of the speech. The editing was done by the independent production company which produced the documentary. The BBC were at fault to let it go on air containing this edit, but it wasn't the BBC that did it.

Your post is thorough and well argued, LemonJam but it seems ironic that defenders of the BBC are getting this small, but, IMO, significant fact wrong.

LemonJam

Yes have watched GB news Primrose53.

Good. Then you will know that they have a very wide range of guests and everybody gets a fair crack of the whip. The BBC only invite people who share their views. They report on people they don’t like and make digs at them but never invite them on. The BBC has always been biased and now it’s clear for all to see and without doubt.

fancythat

LemonJam
The BBC is supposed to be the nation's channel.
Any other is not.

I weirdly feel like Trump is threatening to sue us.
Maybe I am overthinking, and out of step.

Yes have watched GB news Primrose53.

LemonJam
The BBC is supposed to be the nation's channel.
Any other is not.

BBC have always had a massive left wing and London based liberal bias for years. Only challenged by C4; who run a close second.

Hugely patronising
And jobs for the boys and their relatives and elitist friends. Snouts in the trough.

They also act as though they are massively self important and know everything. The Gods of TV.

They need to radically cut their empire

Their iPlayer app is not good and needs updating and replacing.

Big repeat mentality but still make the odd good program and our local BBC North West News is excellent.

As for the feckless Mr Tim Davie, who is said to earn around half a million a year.

I don't think he will.claiming Universal Credit or using his local food bank any time soon.

Do you?

Good Riddance to him

LemonJam. Have you ever watched GB News? They have loads of Labour people on, tonight it is MP Barry Gardiner who is often on there. They are all given ample time to air their views unlike the BBC who, in the unlikely event they get someone on who doesn’t share their views, they sneer at them.

The BBC has now been placed in a crisis- with Trump sending a letter to sue. Our independent broadcaster has been brought into disrepute as a result of the Telegraph's articles last week and Farge calling Trump on Friday to keep him up to speed. There is no doubt that The BBC edited the 70 minute speech in question- for which The BBC Chair Shah apologised today. However this editing decision didn't cause any public or media furore at the time was broad cast in October 2024 and the Telegraph had no concerns at the time. Prescott raised his specific concerns at a BBC internal editing standards meeting following the broadcast and his concerns were discussed, agreements were made about making changes to ensure upholding editing standards remains at the foremost of all editor's minds. Even the Telegraph newspaper at the time reported concerns about Trump's speech and the claims of incitement. The issue in question, focuses on whether the editing decision was fair and impartial. In hindsight, The BBC has apologised today for an editing error.

There are 2 opposing opinions on Trumps' 70 minute speech address January 6 2021- one camp firmly believes he WAS inciting people to fight and storm the Capitol because he believed the election was corrupt and 'stolen". form him The alternative camp believes that he was NOT inciting the public to fight and storm the Capitol. Trump was impeached and both sides, in their legal defence, used the same rambling, 70 minute speech to support their case. Yes I have listened to it all and it's not an attractive speech....

The Telegraph reported that GB news had overtaken The BBC News and Sky News as Britain's most watched news channel for the first time, according to BARB's data "during key slots in July 2025". The Telegraph has a known, well reported history of not supporting The BBC. Boris Johnson, another politician with a right wing bias currently is paid by the Daily Mail and previously worked for and was paid by the Telegraph and waded into the furore via the Telegraph last week. This "moment in time measure" only evidences that GB news was "most watched" news programme compared with BBC News and Sky News at certain times in a designated period. It has never been voted "best news channel"- I have not seen any evidence exists to support that view- posted earlier today.

That begs the question what is the criteria to measure a best news channel??? For me it is not overt right wing political bias with a big proportion of opinion based reporting, I prefer more impartial, less biased, more factual reporting- but I respect views may differ.

GB news was launched in September 2021 with a mix of news coverage and opinion based content. Opinion based, ie inherently biased to the view of the person offering each opinion, is the day to day way of doing things for GB news. I prefer more independent, less biased, more factual news reporting but each to their own. Bias and lack of impartiality in the editing of Trump's speech is the accusation levied against The BBC yet the usual way of doing things and acceptable at GB news?

GB news Hosts include politicians such as Farage, Michael Portillo, Jacob Rees Mogg etc. It is towards extreme Right wing on political issues and bias. GB news last paid Farage, via his company Thorn in the Side (so Farage can pay less tax than if paid via PAYE ) £97,928,40p gross for what amounts to 32 hours work a month from April 2025 to end March 2025. Of course Farage is biased against The BBC as he would prefer its demise. In the vacuum created he would welcome to be able to further feather his nest and promote right wing opinion via GB news and any similar news channels that may ( if BBC detractors have their way) replace The BBC.

2025 polling suggested GB news is the least trusted of the 5 main news broadcasters in Britain. An Ofcom investigation was launched on 12 November 2023, subject 14 separate investigations of Ofcom's impartiality rules, including potential breaches of the rule, that apart from exceptional circumstances, politician's should not act as news readers, reporters or interviewers. That remains a topic of great debate. It is for each and every individual to consider their comfort level with this and decide whther they prefer GB news biased opinion based approach or a public broadcaster approach that seeks to be impartial. Yes The BBC is not perfect and gets things wrong- name me a single media outlet globally that does not get things wrong.

Evidence base for GB News and The Telegraph newspaper bias and credibility ratings compared to The BBC- a huge global organisation, as included in 9/11/25 15.49 post:

"..... google " Bias and Credibility Media Bias/Fact Check" for any individual UK named media source. Eg mediabiasfactcheck.com/gb-news-uk, mediabiasfactcheck.com/daily-telegraph, mediabiasfactcheck.com/bbc - etc for any named media outlet.

That will result in a detailed report for you showing extent of right or left centre views/bias and "High" level of Fact Reporting for your chosen outlet. E.g.
1) BBC scores "High" on Fact Reporting, with some "left centre" bias rather than left centre views ( a continuum).
2) The Telegraph Scores "Mixed" ( i.e. below even "mostly factual") on fact reporting and is much further along the bias continuum going towards extreme Right centre views,
3) GB News "Extreme" right views and "Mixed" ( i.e. below even "mostly factual") on fact reporting,
4) Daily Mail "Low' ( even below mixed!) on fact reporting- and firm "Right" views,
5) Guardian "High" on fact reporting and towards "Left of Centre" on views,
6) Channel 4 News "High' fact finding and a bit towards left of centre views.

The BBC has accepted it made an editing error on the Trump speech video. It commits to doing better and commits to strive for impartial, high fact trusted media broadcasting standards. I only wish other media organisations, including GB news and The Telegraph could strive towards the same commitment. None of them will get it right all the time but at least try....

Though disjointed in The BBC on this issue and its failure to respond more assertively and vigorously last week- I am saddened by the current situation it now finds itself in and fear its demise- but again respect those who hold differing views.

The BBC should not have allowed the cut and spliced speech to be broadcast BUT the people present at the time seem to have done there own cutting and splicing at the time, as they marched to the Capitol and FOUGHT, FOUGHT, FOUGHT. Trump did nothing to stop it for hours and later pardoned the perpetrators of the mayhem.

The programme has done him zero extra reputational damage and cost him zero $s. If it were to be tried in a British court, I would suggest a "fine" of $1 for bad practice would be appropriate.

I do love Radio 4 tho.