Mushroom v BBC - Ofcom Ruling

I have received a reply from Ofcom informing me that they find no grounds to pursue my complaint against the BBC further.  For new readers, I appealed to Ofcom because I considered that the BBC News at Ten report on 14 Feb 18 was inaccurate, biased and misleading and the BBC, through their complaints process, had not addressed my concerns satisfactorily.

In rejecting my submission Ofcom pointed out that their duty under the Communications Act 2003 was to ensure that broadcasters are “duly” impartial and “duly” accurate.  In my case, Ofcom found that the BBC had been duly accurate, not unduly biased and not unduly misleading.

Ofcom said that “due” means adequate or appropriate to the subject and nature of the programme and that “due impartiality” does not therefore mean “an equal division of time has to be given to every view, or that every argument and every facet of every argument has to be represented. 

So, it seems to me, the BBC may construct a programme in which Brexit is in the dock.  However, the evidence for the prosecution need only be “duly” accurate.  Worse, the evidence for the defence need not be heard in full since the subject and nature of the programme is Brexit in the dock; the test of “due impartiality” providing generous cover for how facts are selected and represented.  In sum, it seems to me, if the programme content is roughly (duly) consistent with the editorial line, then anything passes the Ofcom test!  Like Captain Yossarian, I am tempted to let out a respectful whistle and exclaim, “that’s some catch.”  And like Doc Daneeka, you might agree, “it’s the best there is?”

My Reply to the PM

Along with other members of the Conservative Party, I received a personal letter from the Prime Minister telling me how she intends to "take back control of our money, laws, and borders, and begin an exciting new chapter in our nation's history."

This is what I wrote in reply:

Thank you for your letter about your plans to leave the EU dated 3 August 2018.

"I am pleased to hear that you intend to “take back control of our money, laws, and borders and begin a new exciting chapter in our nation’s history.”  This would appear to satisfy the desire of the majority that voted in the Referendum.

However, I have looked at “The Future Relationship Between the United Kingdom and the European Union,” which, you may agree, displays a degree of ambivalence in its title, and taken note of expert opinion on the progress of the Withdrawal Agreement in conjunction with your Chequers Statement.  Despite the copious use of bold type in your letter, the evidence of intention is against you.

I do not believe that what you are proposing will “take back control of our money, laws, and borders.”   Indeed, I dread the future as the unelected EU negotiators (apparently, in joint enterprise with your own Civil Service) run rings round our economy and democracy.  I may not be around long enough to experience your promised “new chapter” but I care enough, as a Conservative, to do my utmost to achieve the true vision of independence from the European Union for my successors."

 

Vote for Boris

Whoopee, Dominic Grieve has announced he would quit the Conservative Party should Boris become leader. Let us hope that the likes of Anna Soubry make a similar principled stand!