THE BBC “fell below standards” by repeatedly failing to identify a commentator as holding free market views, a ruling has found.
The BBC’s Executive Complaints Unit (ECU) reviewed a six-month period of broadcasts and found that no information about a contributor’s political affiliations was given despite the editorial guidelines in place.
The complaint focused on The Papers, on BBC News, which sees commentators and politicians review the day’s newspapers.
A viewer said that the broadcaster had “repeatedly failed to provide an adequate description of the Institute of Economic Affairs (IEA) when its communications director appeared as a guest”.
READ MORE: Alyn Smith calls out Question Time panellist for right-wing organisation's murky funding
The IEA is a shadowy right-wing think tank which does not declare all of its funders.
Reports in openDemocracy revealed that British American Tobacco regularly donates to the think tank, with a Greenpeace/Guardian investigation revealing that BP is another prominent donor.
The IEA has close ties to other right-wing think tanks, some of which operate out of the 55 Tufton Street offices in London, and regularly met other groups at that address to discuss a coordinated strategy.
These other groups included the climate sceptic Global Warming Policy Foundation, the pro-Brexit website Brexit Central, and the Adam Smith Institute, openDemocracy reported.
The ECU considered that it was “necessary” for some information on the IEA to be given to viewers so that it was not presented as a neutral and unbiased source.
However, the BBC had repeatedly failed to do so over the six-month period reviewed.
The ECU quoted editorial guidelines which state: “We should not automatically assume that contributors from other organisations (such as academics, journalists, researchers and representatives of charities and think-tanks) are unbiased. Appropriate information about their affiliations, funding and particular viewpoints should be made available to the audience, when relevant to the context.”
It said in its ruling: “In the case of The Papers, a review of newspapers and websites covering a wide range of topical issues, the ECU agreed some information was necessary for the IEA, in particular reference to its free market orientation.
“In most cases viewed by the ECU over a six month period no such information was given, and this fell below the BBC’s standards of accuracy.”
It said that the finding was reported to the board of BBC News, and “a note was sent to staff reminding them of the need to provide appropriate information about such bodies as the IEA”.
SNP MP Alyn Smith won praise last month after he challenged Emily Carver, a former Tory MP adviser and current head of media for the IEA, on failing to provide “transparency on who we’re all representing”.
Correction: This article previously stated Jad Mouawad is the head of IEA's communications. This was inaccurate.
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