The 12 guiding principles in the BBC impartiality report

The BBC report From Seesaw to Wagon Wheel contains 12 guiding principles to inform the corporation’s approach to impartiality in the face of rapid technological and social change.

Published together with extensive research on audience expectations and perceptions of impartiality, the report is the result of a project first commissioned by the BBC board of governors in conjunction with BBC management in November 2005.

It aims to identify the challenges and risks to impartiality and has been fully endorsed by the BBC Trust, the BBC executive board and the BBC journalism board.

The 12 guiding principles are complementary to the BBC’s editorial guidelines on impartiality and do not replace them.

1. Impartiality is and should remain the hallmark of the BBC as the leading provider of information and entertainment in the United Kingdom, and as a pre-eminent broadcaster internationally. It is a legal requirement, but it should also be a source of pride.

2. Impartiality is an essential part of the BBC’s contract with its audience, which owns and funds the BBC. Because of that, the audience itself will often be a factor in determining impartiality.

3. Impartiality must continue to be applied to matters of party political or industrial controversy. But in today’s more diverse political, social and cultural landscape, it requires a wider and deeper application.

4. Impartiality involves breadth of view, and can be breached by omission. It is not necessarily to be found on the centre ground.

5. Impartiality is no excuse for insipid programming. It allows room for fair-minded, evidence-based judgments by senior journalists and documentary makers, and for controversial, passionate and polemical arguments by contributors and writers.

6. Impartiality applies across all BBC platforms and all types of programme. No genre is exempt. But the way it is applied and assessed will vary in different genres.

7. Impartiality is most obviously at risk in areas of sharp public controversy. But there is a less visible risk, demanding particular vigilance, when programmes purport to reflect a consensus for “the common good”, or become involved with campaigns.

8. Impartiality is often not easy. There is no template of wisdom which will eliminate fierce internal debate over difficult dilemmas. But the BBC’s journalistic expertise is an invaluable resource for all departments to draw on.

9. Impartiality can often be affected by the stance and experience of programme makers, who need constantly to examine and challenge their own assumptions.

10. Impartiality requires the BBC to examine its own institutional values, and to assess the effect they have on its audiences.

11. Impartiality is a process, about which the BBC should be honest and transparent with its audience: this should permit greater boldness in its programming decisions. But impartiality can never be fully achieved to everyone’s satisfaction: the BBC should not be defensive about this but ready to acknowledge and correct significant breaches as and when they occur.

12. Impartiality is required of everyone involved in output. It applies as much to the most junior researcher as it does to the director general. But editors and executive producers must give a strong lead to their teams. They must ensure that the impartiality process begins at the conception of a programme and lasts throughout production: if left until the approval stage, it is usually too late.

Taken from Media Guardian.  A little old, but still applicable.

The BBC, Question Time and the BNP

Back in October last year the BBC were heavily criticised for allowing Nick Griffin, the British National Party leader and Member of the European Parliament for North-West England, a panelist spot on Question Time.

The BBC staunchly defended its decision to allow Mr. Griffin on the programme, with the BBC Trust deciding not to hear any appeals before the programme was broadcast. Deciding, that ‘to do so would undermine the editorial independence of the BBC’. Sir Michael Lyons, BBC Trust Chairman said:

The BBC Trust is aware of the debate and public controversy on this issue and understands that this is a matter of considerable importance to many licence fee payers. We take our responsibilities in this area very seriously in line with the BBC’s constitutional arrangements.

The publically-funded BBC has no allegiance to any political party, and considers itself independent from any ‘party line’. For the BBC to commit to its editorial guidelines and to remain impartial, it has to broadcast the opinions of all legitimate political party’s within British politics. The BBC has a democratic right to do so, be it from the one end of the political spectrum such as Greenpeace, to the other, such as the BNP.

However the broadcasting of Question Time back in October, led to the BBC facing strong opposition from the public, who protested against the BNP leader outside the headquarters in London:

So would it be biased then if the BBC failed to allow Mr. Griffin to go on Question Time? If they didn’t allow him to appear on the programme then certainly, the BBC would have fallen foul on impartiality.

But where do the BBC draw the line between impartiality and propaganda? The protests against Nick Griffin appearing on Question Time were for appropriate reasons. The BNP have particular extremist views and Mr. Griffin routinely makes insinuate racial comments – the protests were against this. But by allowing the BNP a voice on Question Time, have the BBC done the BNP a favour by broadcasting racist and fascist opinion?

Nick Griffin, shortly after the show posted a video on the BNP official website claiming that the BBC were “bias” and that the BNP would put forward a “formal complaint” to the BBC about the handling of the show:

So the BBC acted correctly on issues of impartiality by allowing Nick Grffin to appear on Question Time, but by doing so have they muddied the waters between allowing all to speak freely and misinformation?