A COMPLAINT to the BBC over Ruth Davidson questioning whether the Sturgeon-Salmond affair had “corrupted” Scotland’s institutions has been dragging on for three months and has been referred to the regulator after the broadcaster dismissed it.
John Parker, a reader of The National who is English by birth but whose home for years has been Wales, contacted the BBC after Davidson appeared on The World at One (WATO) on February 24 ahead of Salmond’s anticipated, but postponed, appearance before the committee investigating the Scottish Government’s handling of harassment allegations against him.
“Having successfully complained to the BBC before now (Nigel Lawson being allowed to air climate denial talking points unchallenged on the Today programme, August 2017) I decided to do so again,” said Parker.
“The [Salmond] story was given some 12 minutes and top-of-the-agenda status.
“The sole interviewee, Ruth Davidson, was allowed for over five minutes to make insinuations of institutional corruption, an SNP cover-up and malfeasance by Sturgeon, with no serious attempt made to challenge her or present any alternative construction of events.”
READ MORE: Ruth Davidson's BBC clip on indyref mandates comes back to haunt her
In the interview, Davidson said there were questions to be asked about whether Scotland’s democratic institutions were corrupt, which had minutes before formed part of political correspondent Nick Eardley’s news report. Davidson’s interview was followed by a report from the BBC’s Scotland editor Sarah Smith.
Parker, who is not an SNP member, recorded and transcribed the entire programme segment, and said: “All in all, a very one sided and tendentious presentation to be making with Holyrood elections just a few weeks away.
“My complaint was rebuffed at all levels up to and including Executive Complaints Unit (ECU). I didn’t feel the rebuttals reasonably addressed my concern, some of the arguments made being quite jaw dropping.”
On April 25 he raised the complaint with Ofcom, who are yet to respond.
In his original complaint, Parker said Davidson’s claims were “unsubstantiated”, telling them: “You cannot seriously claim to be covering this story properly, or to have much interest in actually explaining it, if she is the only person you interview.
“It was only later when I tuned into the BBC Scottish news that I realised that one reason for the non-publication/redaction of evidence that so exercises Davidson is the protection of the victims in the case. Why did you not point any of this out?”
In response, the BBC said it would be “fair to suggest” that presenter Sara Montague was “courteous” in allowing Davidson to respond to questions, and reassured him “there is no ulterior motive in either challenging or not challenging specific points on any occasion”.
They closed down Parker’s complaint after he contacted them again, but he then raised it with the Executive Complaints Unit (ECU), telling them: “The World at One report was defective and unbalanced, and Sarah Smith ... exhibits a bias that is unacceptable.”
READ MORE: Ruth Davidson caught out as she makes appearance on SNP celeb livestream
Dismissing the complaint, ECU complaints director, Colin Tregear, said: “I do not believe there are grounds for me to uphold your complaint. There is no further right of appeal against this decision ... it is open to you to ask the broadcasting regulator, Ofcom, to consider your complaint.
Ofcom said yesterday: “The BBC’s World at One case is still under assessment. We’ll publish our decision in due course.”
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel