The BBC’s Executive Complaints Unit (ECU) has responded to complaints about its news coverage of an anti-Ulez protest in London’s Trafalgar Square on Saturday, April 15th, 2023. BBC London News broadcast at the time that:
Local protestors and mainstream politicians were joined by conspiracy theorists and Far Right groups.
I was among many people to complain at the time, disgusted at the BBC’s smear. I was at the protest myself, the first of any kind that I had attended. Since my previous exposure to similar protests – such as those against the lockdowns over the course of the pandemic – was limited to watching clips on Twitter, I was slightly anxious. Were things likely to kick off? Were the police going to ‘kettle’ us all in a side street off the Strand?
I could not have been more wrong. I was overwhelmed by how many families were there, abundant small children clambering up the bases of Landseer’s lions. There were a handful of Tory politicians some of whom spoke from the platform, but there was no other political presence whatsoever.
When I saw the BBC London news coverage, I was therefore appalled. I wasn’t too concerned about the claim that there were a few conspiracy theorists there – quite a few placard-holders were plainly ‘Team James’ – but “Far Right groups” seemed to me something for which there was no evidence at all. This appeared to be an attempt on the BBC’s part to suppress dissent towards the Ulez expansion by smearing opponents. This struck me as a sinister turn from the national broadcaster and so I complained.
On April 21st, the BBC responded to my complaint as follows:
BBC London had deployed a reporter to the protest and she witnessed, and documented, first hand, motifs on tabards and placards with explicit Nazi references, along with other epithets about world order and democracy.
I walked around the protest for about three hours on April 15th and I must have missed the explicit Nazi references, presumably displayed by the “Far Right groups”. I complained again, asking for evidence.
On May 12th the BBC rejected my additional complaint as follows:
We remain satisfied our BBC London reporter gave an honest account of what she witnessed that day.
At this point, I escalated the complaint to the ECU, one of 44 people to do so on the grounds of both accuracy and impartiality. Today the BBC acknowledged the following:
In relation to “Far Right groups”, we recognised that the [conspiracy theory] groups named above might have Far Right (or indeed Far Left) adherents, but did not consider this to be evidence of the presence of “Far Right groups”. The programme-makers directed our attention to the deployment by some demonstrators of Nazi imagery, symbolism and slogans directed against the Mayor of London which we accepted was consistent with tactics used predominantly by certain Far Right groups, but we saw no grounds for concluding that they were used exclusively by such groups. We also noted the presence of an individual who seemed, from social media postings, very likely to have been associated with the presence of a Far Right group at a previous demonstration, but the evidence fell short of establishing that he was an adherent of that group, and we saw no evidence that other representatives of the group were present. While it was clear from our dealings with the programme-makers that the statement about the presence of Far Right groups was made in good faith, we assessed the evidence differently. In our judgement it was suggestive of the presence of Far Right groups but fell short of establishing that such groups had in fact been represented among the demonstrators. This aspect of the complaint has been upheld.
This shows pretty clearly that the idea of “Far Right groups” being present at the protest was a complete fiction. Feelings are running high about Khan and some placards quite possibly likened his administrative style to infamous dictators of the past but for anyone to have spun this as evidence of “Far Right groups” is a stretch to say the least. As for the “individual who seemed, from social media postings, very likely to have been associated with the presence of a Far Right group at a previous demonstration”, the words ‘straws’ and ‘clutching’ spring to mind.
In addition to upholding the complaint about accuracy, the BBC has also partially upheld the complaint on impartiality which derives from the close resemblance of the BBC’s language in its news report to that of Khan himself at a People’s Town Hall in Ealing in March. When asked about people’s misgivings about the Ulez expansion, he said that its opponents were “in coalition with the Far Right” and “joining hands with some of those outside who are part of a Far Right group”.
The BBC has now acknowledged the “impression of bias” and upheld this part of the complaint, while spinning it as something of an accident, something that “might well have been perceived as lending a degree of corroboration to the Mayor’s comments”.
While it is a step in the right direction for the BBC to uphold two aspect of the complaints, there remain unanswered questions about its broader coverage of Ulez and to what extent its coverage is being unduly influenced by Sadiq Khan.
Consider the article in the Daily Express published on 24th June about a senior producer at the BBC that made contact with Reform U.K. London Mayoral candidate Howard Cox to blow the whistle on the BBC’s suppression of coverage critical of the Ulez expansion. (Cox, by the way, was also in attendance at the April demo but had not at that point declared as a Mayoral candidate):
The leak to Reform U.K. Mayoral candidate Howard Cox… reveals that Mr. Khan had applied pressure on the BBC over reporting the issue. It said that journalists wanting to run stories now needed top level clearance over something that is set to be a major electoral issue in the London Mayor election and general election both next year.
The Express article went on to explain email exchanges that the senior BBC producer had received:
The BBC producer was told in an email to news staff from Dan Fineman, Senior News Editor BBC South East: “If any platforms are doing a story on Ulez charges in the South and Southeast we now need to do a mandatory referral to Jason Horton or Robert Thomson (re) outstanding complaint with the Mayor of London which is very live at the moment.”
Jason Horton is the BBC’s Director of Production for BBC Local Services and Robert Thomson is Head of the BBC in London and the East. This suggests a level of collusion between very senior staff at the BBC and Sadiq Khan with a direct influence over editorial approaches to news coverage of anti-Ulez protests.
It was also reported by the whistleblower that a BBC London investigation into Ulez was now been paused because of the Mayor of London’s pressure on the BBC.
In short, Khan appears to be exercising at the very least some form of influence over the BBC’s coverage of anti-Ulez protests. This is not an “impression of bias” – this more closely resembles a real, undiluted bias against anti-Ulez campaigners on the part of the nation’s publicly-funded broadcaster at the behest of the Labour Mayor of London. The BBC has come up with a partial and grudging apology but I suspect that the truth about its willingness to suppress dissent with “Far Right” smears is more extensive than it’s prepared to admit. I hope that doesn’t make me a “conspiracy theorist”.
To join in with the discussion please make a donation to The Daily Sceptic.
Profanity and abuse will be removed and may lead to a permanent ban.
Well pursued! It’s only persistent digging that turns up the worms.
Who cares what the BBC says, since when would any level of credibility be given to the BBC… Its like complaining to the flat earthers…
Ok prove to me the earth isn’t flat and is a sphere, without using anyone else’s photographs
And when is being rude been allowed here
When the moon landings are obviously fake
I rarely watch or believe anything the BBC says these days but sadly many older people in particular still turn to the Beeb for a trustworthy version of the truth.
The problem is, a significant proportion of the population look to the BBC’s their ‘trusted’ source, so it really is about fine the Govt clamped down on then and made it very clear that their legal Charter for impartiality is there deliberately and for a purpose. Will they though? I doubt it.
Since when has lying become acceptable?
Since the left went full woke, It’s now their main political lever!
“When it becomes serious, you have to lie.” ― Jean-Claude Juncker
Junker.. ex president of the European Commission.. says it all really..
“We all have to lie sometimes for the greater cause.” (Scientist to Prof Fenton referring to misinformation on climate change programme).
Well if its for the ‘greater cause’ then.. yes.. of course..
The left’s philosophy is ‘the end justifies the means’. If that means they have to lie, cheat and kill to rescue the public from capitalism and liberty, they’re willing to do it.
How far is far right I ask myself.. just up the road from extreme right. It seems you can’t safeguard your own well being today without being labelled.
I’m hovering between being an NVE (non violent extremist) and a DT (domestic terrorist).. and there was me thinking I was just a retired working class bloke who cared about his family, fellow man, and country.. I’m obviously mistaken.. silly me!
Exactly. If I’m “far right”, which the BBC probably thinks I am, then what’s wrong with being “far right”?
But by using these terms all the BBC do is reveal that climate is a political issue not a scientific one. ——Or as someone once pointed out “When you mix politics and science, what you get is —–Politics”.
Science only gets you so far. Ultimately everything is political. That’s why we have politics. In this case the science being used isn’t really science.
The BBC also reveal that they are happy to basically call everyone who doesn’t agree with them a Nazi, without having the balls to actually use that word.
They.. the BBC.. will never call anyone a Bolshevik either.. that would be a call too close to home..
I give you my version of what you just said. ——-Government cannot wait for the science so they use “consensus science” as the excuse for forging ahead with policies. Which by the way are mostly the same Liberal Progressives policies as they would want whether the climate was changing or not. —–In other words, it is and never was about the climate in the first place. ——-And as for the BBC, they are simply the climate crisis megaphone.
Indeed. I guess my point was that even with honest, accurate science there are political decisions to be made because there will always be tradeoffs – science is unlikely to come up with perfect solutions to complex problems. It’s a political decision to choose which competing interests are the most important. Even with covid I actually think it was right that politicians should have made the big decisions – they just made the wrong ones. In Sweden, politicians listened to experts and things turned out reasonably well, in the UK our politicians at least pretended to listen to experts and it was a shitshow.
My actual status would be ‘peak common sense’ which in today’s terms translates to ‘far right.’
Oh well.
We should perhaps take comfort from our enemy’s desperate attempts to smear us – the more desperate they get the more it’s clear they feel threatened
The ‘far right’ are left wing extremists. They have nothing to do with conservatives and libertarians.
Well said George. I’m probably considered “far right” but all that’s happened is we’ve probably stayed politically where we’ve always been and “the establishment” has moved further and further to the left. Just my theory, like my conspiratorial ones, which seem to be coming remarkably true.
BBC reporters said they had seen someone at the demonstration who had made social media postings. How did they know his/hee name and user name and why did they trawl the internet looking for it.
this suggests to me a very active political agenda and deployment of significant resources by the BBC. We’re they promoted by Khan’s staff on this too.
Much indignation expressed on this thread about BBC bias but I wonder how many commentators are still paying their TV propaganda tax? This was a nasty habit I gave up long ago.
I’ve got mixed feelings about this. In general, making the BBC look like the far left political organisation that they are is a good thing. On the other hand, are we being too defensive and/or not questioning the right things.
What do the BBC mean by “far right”? What is wrong with being “far right”? Why do we accept it as a “smear” term?
Believing there are people trying to bring about a New World Order might sound far-fetched (I’m undecided) but why is that belief “far right”?
“Far right” is basically a way to call people Nazis or Fascists (by Fascists I mean Mussolini’s lot) without saying say.
“Believing there are people trying to bring about a New World Order might sound far-fetched (I’m undecided) but why is that belief “far right”?”
Well you do surprise me tof. You will be on my side within twelve months and that’s a certainty.
I don’t doubt there is evil afoot, just unsure of the extent to which it is coordinated
‘Twas ever thus – the new elements that seem most dangerous to me are it’s global nature and the ease with which technology can be used to control people
Never forget that Hitler had at least one islamic batallion (common enemy the jews) – that to me makes Khan Far-Right
Meloni, Orban, LePen, AfD, BBB, VOX, any leader or party, ostensibly with concerns about immigration & supports traditional ideas of ‘family’ is labelled ‘far right’ by the BBC. It’s exactly the attitude demonstrated in the Lady Chatterley’s Lover trial (1960), when the QC asked “would you let your wife or servant read this?” It’s the Left now demonstrating a kind of patronising contempt for the rest of us. “Let them eat cake”, could well be a slogan by either main party at the next election.
Perhaps we should all jump on the Prime Miniters house. That doesn’t seem to bother the Progressive left (like the BBC) very much as they fall for the “global boiling” narrative coming from the one world government people at the UN.—– Yep you can stop traffic and sporting events and glue yourself to the street but to the BBC you are simply “highlighting” a serious “emergency”. But if you don’t want your car taken away and your gas central heating ripped out you are FAR RIGHT.
Or be White of course..
Far right is only far when viewed from the extreme left.
Many conspiracy theorists are now being proved to be so far right.
Excellent work Richard. The BBC reporter clearly holds a worldview whereby anything challenging the confected consensus/elite narrative on climate change is seriously triggering. That’s why she made up stuff about Nazi signs. The fact that authoritarian Mayor Khan uses his ethnicity as does the SNP leader to “other” his opponents is typical of the contemporary left. Unfortunately media are now far from disinterested in issues, as the increasingly histrionic Justin Rowlatt shows, they are activists for a cause. That means they have to find ways to discredit their opponents. The Far Right slur is the standard reply. However it’s wearing thin, and the genuine coalition of concerned Londoners cannot be silenced.
The weasel-wording in the BBC statement is excellent — We sent reporters supposed to do nothing but take images supporting our preexisting far-rightness theory but they couldn’t find any. As we were convinced they must have been there, though, we simply reported our theory as fact without having evidence for it — after all, compared to the number of people watching our programmes, London is village and most of our audience won’t have been there.
The BBC and the rest of the MSM do this all the time, so you can either complain and pursue every single instance, or embrace your position on the political spectrum as they define it. If resisting progressive nonsense makes me “far right”, so be it.
The first step is to ask them what they mean by “far right”.
The BBC need to be shut down permanently they are a toxic rumor in this country, protecting paedophiles, promoting racism and advocating transgenderism
Like all petty dictators Khan doesn’t like it when people see through his lies (children’s health vs more tax for me to waste) and complain. Typical, leftie nut case. Thank heavens I’m not living up there anymore
“I hope that doesn’t make me a “conspiracy theorist”
I love being called a conspiracy theorist. I take it as kudos nowadays and it usually means they’ve lost the argument.
Does anyone take the Beeb seriously these days..? Oh dear sadly yes many still do.
This one excruciatingly long boiling frog!
“In short, Khan appears to be exercising at the very least some form of influence over the BBC’s coverage of anti-Ulez protests.”
Khan is a mendacious snake. A Bare-faced liar and a self-serving villain.
I’ve posted this before, but if you haven’t seen it, just watch London Mayor Sadiq Khan, unable to answer simple questions about his claims, quickly resorting to insults. He is a disgrace and should be thrown out of public office and locked up.
This clip should be seen by everyone of voting age in and around Greater London.
https://www.facebook.com/TogetherDeclaration/videos/9400281276650412/?extid=CL-UNK-UNK-UNK-AN_GK0T-GK1C&mibextid=1YhcI9R