The leaked memo raising concerns about BBC impartiality was an early Christmas present for those who believe the UK’s biggest public service broadcaster is biased and needs to be reformed and cut down to size.
For some, the crisis the memo has sparked – which has led to the resignation of the BBC’s director general and its head of news and a threat from US president Donald Trump of a US$1 billion lawsuit – reflects a terrible failure of internal governance. For others, it represents a “coup” at Broadcasting House, launched by a faction within the BBC’s senior echelons seeking to push the tone of the broadcaster’s news coverage to the right.
But whatever the case may be, this crisis comes at a pivotal moment in the broadcaster’s history, as it approaches the once-a-decade renewal of its royal charter.
This arcane-sounding instrument is the BBC’s foundational document. It gives the corporation independence from politicians and civil servants on a day-to-day basis, while also ensuring a measure of accountability to the public which owns and funds it.
Crucially, the charter does not run in perpetuity. Typically, it needs to be renewed every ten years. This gives parliament an opportunity to hold the BBC to account for its performance over the previous decade, and to decide whether fundamental reform is needed. Conceivably, parliament could decide that no new charter should be granted, effectively ending the BBC’s existence as a public corporation.
Negotiating with the government over charter renewal is, unsurprisingly, a major preoccupation for BBC leaders in the years before each charter expires. The current charter ends on December 31 2027. As a result of Tim Davie’s resignation, the BBC now lacks an experienced director general at a crucial time. Some believe that this crisis therefore represents an existential threat to the BBC.
Historical precedent
Allegations of political bias – generally that the BBC leans to the left – have existed for almost as long as the corporation has. Back in the 1920s, the government’s response was to impose restrictions on the type, amount and timing of news and current affairs coverage the BBC could broadcast.
The BBC had a monopoly on broadcasting at the time, and lawmakers worried what it would mean for UK politics if the BBC started to editorialise in support of one or other of the main political parties. As one early regulator put it: “Once you let broadcasting into politics, you will never be able to keep politics out of broadcasting.”
Yet others recognised that radio, and later television, were key means to disseminate news. The ban on “controversial” broadcasting could not last. The BBC itself pressed for the legal restrictions to be relaxed, and governments gradually gave way. By the outbreak of the second world war the BBC had become a significant, and increasingly trusted, source of news for audiences across the UK and around the world. After the war, it massively expanded its journalistic capacity and became the major news operation that it is today.
Yet allegations that the BBC was politically biased never disappeared. They reached a peak when Margaret Thatcher was prime minister. Thatcher believed that the BBC was unsympathetic to her political programme and to the Conservative party more generally. She particularly resented the corporation’s news coverage of the Falklands War, the Miners’ Strike, and the Troubles in Northern Ireland.
Thatcher used two strategies to bring the BBC into line. First, she sought to install a more sympathetic senior leadership team at the BBC. Two prominent Conservative supporters were put on the BBC board, with Stuart Ward as chair (replaced after his untimely death by another Thatcher loyalist, Marmaduke Hussey) and William Rees-Mogg as vice chair.
One senior BBC executive thought that Rees-Mogg acted less like a vice-chair, and “more like the leader of the opposition”. A long-running dispute over a BBC Panorama documentary broadcast in 1984 on far-right tendencies within the Conservative party allowed senior board members to oust director general Alasdair Milne.
The new regime at the BBC also drove through reforms designed fundamentally to change the way that the BBC worked. The corporation moved away from its old public sector ways of operating, towards commercialisation and outsourcing, in a bid to reduce costs and increase revenues. These reforms were championed by a new director general recruited from the private sector, John Birt. The wider aim was to reduce the monopolistic power of the BBC and allow more powerful commercial competitors to emerge. Birt also imposed a much tighter set of editorial guidelines on BBC journalists.
Thatcher even raised the prospect of abolishing the licence fee which funded the BBC. However, Professor Alan Peacock, the economist commissioned by the government to report on how to fund the corporation, shied away from recommending this drastic step.
What’s next for the BBC?
The BBC ultimately survived the existential threats of the 1980s. The price was radical transformation, as the BBC became leaner and increasingly driven by the need to generate commercial revenues to support its public service activities.
Some think that the current controversy reflects the attempts of previous governments to stack the BBC board with supporters, as Thatcher once did. The political loyalties of the next director general, and of any new appointees to the board, will as a result be intensely scrutinised.
Will charter review also involve fundamental reform of the way the BBC is governed and funded? The licence fee has become a lightning rod for hostility to the corporation and the future of this financing system is certainly in doubt.
In the coming battle over charter renewal, the outcome of debates about how the BBC is governed, and how it is funded, will determine what sort of BBC can survive past 2027. The next director general will need to restore public trust in BBC news, satisfy politicians that rigorous impartiality can and will be guaranteed, and navigate the financial challenges that may arise from potential legal settlements or the end of the licence fee system.
That is, of course, assuming that the BBC is able to learn the lessons of its own history, and adapt to survive its latest existential crisis.
Simon Potter received funding from the Leverhulme Trust, 2016-2019, for a research project on the history of international broadcasting.
This article was originally published on The Conversation. Read the original article.
