A READER of The National who raised a complaint with the BBC and Ofcom over an interview with Baroness Ruth Davidson should find out by the end of the month of what the outcome is.
John Parker complained after a World at One (WATO) programme in February – ahead of the anticipated, but postponed, appearance of Alex Salmond before the committee investigating the Scottish Government’s handling of harassment allegations against him.
He said the story was given around 12 minutes of top-of-the-news airtime and Davidson was allowed more than five minutes to allege institutional corruption and an SNP cover-up with no serious challenge against her.
Parker – an Englishman by birth but long-time resident of Wales – told us in May he had previously had some success with a complaint to the broadcaster when Lord Nigel Lawson was allowed to air climate denial points unchallenged.
READ MORE: Ruth Davidson becomes non-executive director at soup company
On the World at One, Davidson was interviewed after reports from the BBC’s Scotland editor Sarah Smith and political correspondent Nick Eardley.
She said there were questions to be asked over whether Scotland’s democratic institutions were corrupt, which had featured in Eardley’s report.
Parker, who recorded and transcribed the entire programme segment, said: “All in all, a very one-sided and tendentious presentation to be making with Holyrood elections just a few weeks away.”
In his original complaint, he 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.”
The BBC said it would be “fair” to suggest that presenter Sarah Montague (above) was “courteous” in allowing Davidson to answer questions, and added: “There is no ulterior motive in either challenging or not challenging specific points on any occasion.”
His complaint was rebuffed at every level of the BBC, with some arguments he described as “quite jaw-dropping”.
He then raised the matter with Ofcom, but told us in May he was frustrated they were taking so long to investigate it.
However, yesterday a spokesperson for Ofcom told us: “That complaint is still under assessment, the results of this will be announced in a forthcoming Broadcast Bulletin. The next one is due to be published on August 31 after the bank holiday.”
Parker said he is now looking forward to seeing the response to his complaint, but said BBC news items had to be balanced immediately.
“I can’t help wondering if it’s your email that prompted them to include the complaint in their next bulletin,” he said. “But obviously it could still be co-incidence. I don’t really have a lot to add except surprise that it’s taken this long for it even to be considered.
“Whenever I look at the Ofcom website, I see many investigations launched, complaints assessed and decisions made on broadcasts occurring much later than February 28, 2021. For me the February 28 World at One item was a disgrace and the BBC should be held to account for it.”
He added: “The only reason I can imagine for the complaint not being upheld would be that the BBC covered the issue elsewhere in a way that gave proper context and represented the SNP/Scottish Government point of view.
“I’m not aware that this ever happened, but even if it did, I would still argue that since you can’t guarantee the audience tuning in to subsequent coverage, balance should be achieved on the spot.”
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