BBC in ‘deep trouble’

BBC in ‘deep trouble’
: The Guardian reports:

The BBC is in “deep trouble” and faces a tough battle to get its licence fee renewed in the wake of the Hutton inquiry, the head of the independent television commission warned today.

And the head of one of Britain’s biggest independent TV companies declared that the “game is up” for the board of governors because of the hasty way they handled the row over Andrew Gilligan’s controversial Today programme report.

One bad reporter can help bring down an institution. But, of cousre, the institution helps.

I hope, for the sake of the business, that media executives have learned from the Jayson Blair and Andrew Gilligan scandals. It’s critical that we remember credibility is Job 1.

The Times took drastic action to protect its credibility.

The BBC blindly defended itself rather than its credibility.

Of course, the BBC is a big and easy target — because of ideology, because of its government support, and also because of its hubris. But that’s all the more reason why it must be careful to protect its credibity.

For credibility is the only asset we have.

: Elsewhere in the Guardian, its editor, Alan Rusbridger defends the BBC or, more accurately, attacks those who attack it. I respect Rusbridger — he’s a nice guy and a helluvan editor — but his column sounds like a kid on a playground stomping his feet and shouting, “not fair, not fair!” after legitimately losing a point.

“It is open season on the BBC,” he writes, “and the age of irony is surely dead.”

Graydon Carter declared irony dead because of 9.11. Rusbridger writes irony’s obit because those who are attacking the BBC are not above attack themselves.

“Sack the hack,” demands the Sun, labelling Andrew Gilligan “a second-rate journalist who cannot be trusted”. Savour that for a moment. Roll it around your tongue and then thumb through the most recent research on who the public most trusts to tell the truth.

Funnily enough, the BBC knocks the Sun out of the park. BBC1 scores 92%, the Sun 11%. Bend over backwards to be fair to Rupert Murdoch and exclude all but the Sun’s own readers. Even then, it can barely scrape together a feeble 21%.

But, Alan, it’s not the Sun that’s on trial here. It’s not the Sun that tried to bring down the government (well, at least not this time). It’s not the Sun whose actions led to a suicide. It’s not the Sun that stubbornly defended bad reporting from a reporter known for bad reporting. It’s not the sun that is supported by its audience and is now in danger of losing that support.

Watch Oz,Alan: Just because one murderer accuses another murderer of murder, it doesn’t make the victim any less dead.

When he was in New York for the New York Magazine/Guardian conference on media and the war, Rusbridger said that if the BBC were cleared in journalistic and judicial inquiry into Gilligan’s and the government’s actions, then it would be important to come to the BBC’s defense for the sake of the business. And give the Guardian points: It has reported on the story with impressive impartiality and depth.

But clearly, it hasn’t turned out the way Rusbridger hoped. Gilligan screwed up bigtime and the BBC screwed up defending him, deaf to the substance of the criticism.

So, Alan, it’s equally important, finding out that the BBC violated its trust, to castigate the BBC. We must police our own, lest we be policed.

Rusbridger sees some hope in the hiring of ombudsmen at news organizations. I don’t. That compartmentalizes the most important job of editors themselves: safeguarding the credibility of their institutions and, with that, the instutition of journalism. It further separates editors from their audience.

Rusbridger says the BBC should appoint an ombudsman.

No, first, the BBC should do what the Times did and finally — even if it is too late — take seriously the serious criticism of its work and its management. It should come clean and clean house, getting rid of Gilligan and the top managers who attacked others first before examing themselves.

And then, instead of hiring an ombudsman, just have your top news executives read the weblogs and forums that attack them (no, you don’t have to read the Sun) and recognize that sometimes, the audience knows better than you do. The audience is the best ombudsman you’ll ever find.

8 responses to “BBC in ‘deep trouble’”

  1. Cooper Avatar

    Sorry to burst your bubble but the BBC is ultimately accountable to the British Public who pay for it and not to hysterical jumped-up bloggers.

  2. Laddy Avatar

    While I agree with most of your points, I beg to differ with respect to the NY Times having cleaned up its act. The Times has not cleaned up its act. Krugman still distorts and is never forced by the editors to correct his mistakes. The same goes for Dowd. News stories are still slanted. Witness the difference with the Washington Post last week with Milbanks’ ridiculous dowdification of Cheney’s comments. The Post jumped right in the next day to make the correction. While one can argue that Milbanks is on the news side and Krugman and Dowd the opinion side, I don’t see what difference that distinction makes. Distortion is distortion. I believe Milbanks should be fired for his deliberate distortion. Same goes for Dowd and Krugman at the Times. None of the three has the slightest bit of integrity.

  3. Old Grouch Avatar
    Old Grouch

    Gee, Cooper, where does Jeff say the BBC should be “accountable to… jumped up bloggers”?
    If I were a Director, I would be scanning (or, more likely, have some minion scan for me) websites such as this one or this one, if only for “know-your-enemy” purposes. The same thing could be accomplished by carefully reviewing listener/viewer correspondence, but the web has the advantage of not being subject to filtering by the BBC’s internal bureaucracy. Subordinates often conceal or minimize problems when reporting to their superiors. Extra-organizational sources of information might serve to raise needed questions at the top, which could, in turn, help avoid such debacles in the future.

  4. JohninLondon Avatar
    JohninLondon

    I’m part of the “British public” and I am pissed off with the BBC bias and with the licence fee.
    This week’s evidence at the Hutton enquiry was terrible for the BBC. They effectively withdrew the Gilligan story that No 10 had transformed the dossier against the wishes of the intelligence chiefs.
    In my book, the BBC are responsible for Dr Kelly’s death. The BBC lied at reporter level, lied at Head of News Level, lied at Director General level and then lied at the Board of Governors level. A total bloody shambles.
    The Chairman of the Governors is in front of Hutton next week. He will be torn apart.
    The Tories are now talking about halving the licence fee. Good.
    But meantime – let’s have some resignations in BBC top management. They are trying to make Gilli-Gone the fall-guy. This fish rots from the head.

  5. PJF Avatar

    Cooper probably felt really, really good protesting that the BBC is ultimately accountable to the British Public. But this can only be because he is utterly deluded about BBC public accountabilty. There isn’t any. Cooper sees Rageh Omar sitting in the Queen Vic telling him that it’s his/her BBC – so, hey, it must be. Cooper sees Anne Robinson reading out letters of complaint – so, hey look, the BBC responds to its audience.
    The reason the BBC scores so highly in trust polls is because the British public have been fed a diet of propaganda – mostly from the BBC itself – that the BBC is “impartial”. People know that the the Sun, the Daily Mail, the Daily Mirror and the Guardian have political axes to grind so it isn’t surprising they regard those with suspicion. But they actually still believe that the BBC is impartial. Gradually, but not nearly as quickly as Mr Jarvis would like to think, the British public is beginning to notice that the BBC is not impartial.
    The BBC is, to all intents and purposes, the Guardian (mindset) Broadcasting Corporation. That’s why Rusbridger defends it so earnestly. Without the BBC, the left-liberal viewpoint will just become one of many that has to compete for attention based on merit. Since the current twilight zone thinking that currently occupies the left-liberal slot has very little merit, it should be obvious why Rusbridger & co are so desperate to promote it by forcing everybody to pay for it. They will see the house searches, the fines and the prison sentences as a perfectly reasonable price for others to pay in order to keep the Guardian mindset pumping into nearly every home in the country.
    BTW, Cooper, if ever you’d like a job at the BBC (assuming you don’t already have one) they advertise most of their positions in – the Guardian.

  6. R C Dean Avatar

    Ah, but the BBC isn’t accountable to anyone because everyone who owns a TV is forced to pay for the BBC whether they want to or not. See, the BBC is NOT accountable to the British public because there isn’t a damn thing the British public can do about the BBC.
    The Sun, on the other hand, is directly accountable to its readers because they make a decision every single day about whether to continue supporting the Sun.
    See how this works? Market-based entity=very high degree of accountability. Government-based entity=insulated from accountability. It ain’t rocket science, folks.

  7. hugh macleod Avatar

    What’s really funny is what a love-fest the Beeb had with “New Labour” (the current government’s party) back is the 90’s.
    The Beeb is basically a political institution, an extension of the Civil Service. It made a power play and lost.

  8. Richard Aubrey Avatar
    Richard Aubrey

    How on earth does anybody expect journalists to pay attention to readers?
    It’s the readers’ job to pay attention to journalists.
    Let’s get a grip here.