BBC under scrutiny for editing Trump’s January 6 speech

Jeff Bennett:

President Trump has threatened to sue the BBC for $1 billion, claiming the broadcaster distorted his role in the January 6 Capitol attack.

According to Mr. Trump’s legal team, a BBC documentary that aired ahead of the 2024 presidential election stitched together statements made by Mr. Trump to make it appear as if he urged his supporters to, in his own words, fight like hell immediately after directing them to march to the U.S. Capitol.

In fact, the separation between the two lines was more than 50 minutes. The repercussions were swift. In the wake of controversy and growing backlash over perceived bias at the BBC, two senior executives at the broadcaster have resigned. These are Director General Tim Davie and Chief Executive of BBC News Deborah Torres.

Torness defended the BBC’s reputation while speaking to reporters this week.

Deborah Turness, former CEO, BBC News:

I resigned over the weekend because the responsibility fell on me. But I would like to make one thing very clear. BBC News is not institutionally biased. That’s why it’s the most trusted news provider in the world.

Jeff Bennett:

Joining us now is Brian Stelter, CNN’s chief media analyst.

Brian, always good to see you. Thank you for being with us.

Brian Stelter, CNN’s chief media correspondent:

Thanks.

Jeff Bennett:

So this documentary in question, Panorama, is the crown jewel of the BBC’s reporting process. Help us understand more about this editorial violation, the edit itself, and why President Trump and his supporters say he misled viewers.

Brian Stelter:

This is correct. This is an important program in the BBC schedule.

This documentary was broadcast just before the US presidential elections. It was a documentary about Trump’s re-election campaign called “Trump: A Second Chance.” She conducted interviews with Trump voters. It has really highlighted the voices of America’s voters. I actually think that if the Trump White House watched the documentary, they would find a lot to like in the documentary.

But there was this moment when the video was shown on January 6, and Trump’s speech was shown on the Ellipse, and it was edited in a way that was clearly a huge mistake. I would call this a big mistake, a big journalistic failure, but in a very narrow way, because it was a small part of a long documentary, and more importantly, because no one noticed it at the time.

There was no protest last year. There was no anger. This only became a story about a week ago when The Telegraph obtained a leaked memo revealing what went wrong with this documentary. Now Trump is calling for the entire documentary to be pulled, but like I said, it’s a really thoughtful and careful film with one big mistake about January 6th.

Jeff Bennett:

Looking back, we know the exact timeline. We know all the testimony about what Donald Trump did not do on January 6, his inaction as violence erupted, and his delay in calling in the National Guard.

How can the factual record support his claim that BBC editing distorted the meaning of his words?

Brian Stelter:

Yes, and Trump’s behavior that day, his combative tone in the speech, and his frequent references to combat all contributed to the producers’ decision to string these words together.

There is no indication that it was malicious, meaning it was not intended to interfere in the US election. But this is something that happened during the production process, perhaps by an outside production company. We don’t know exactly how the BBC reviewed it beforehand or who was ultimately responsible.

But, as I mentioned, these two senior executives have now resigned as a result of the uproar. More broadly, for President Trump, this is an opportunity to challenge a major media company. This is an opportunity for him to declare his innocence on January 6th. And I think that’s why this story resonated with so many Trump voters, and certainly among Trump aides.

They are trying to say that Trump did nothing wrong that day and that it is actually the media’s fault.

Jeff Bennett:

How seriously is the BBC taking the threat of a billion-dollar lawsuit?

Brian Stelter:

My sense is that this is a very serious threat within the BBC. There is a lot of anxiety. Employees are concerned about what the board will do. We did not hear much about the plan within the Board of Governors.

There are 13 board members who oversee the BBC. Usually, one of those members is the general manager, the guy who just resigned, who just resigned. Now Trump’s lawyers have given a deadline of Friday. There’s actually no literal deadline. I mean, the BBC is under no obligation to respond for any legal reason.

But it seems likely that Trump will press ahead with a lawsuit if he doesn’t get what he wants from the BBC. Now the BBC is in the same position that Paramount, Disney, the New York Times and the Wall Street Journal were in right now. Trump is suing both publications.

Every media company, when challenged by Trump, must ask: Do we fight or do we retreat? Do we fight in court or give in to his demands? This is what the BBC board must now decide.

Jeff Bennett:

Conservative critics in the UK allege a systemic left-wing bias at the BBC. What does all this mean for BBC international reporting and its reputation?

Brian Stelter:

right. Three things happening at once. You have this actual journalistic scandal about bad editing, which is a huge mistake, but in a small part of a big documentary.

Then you also have this coordinated political campaign, mostly from the Conservatives in the UK, to undermine the BBC, and challenge its dominance in Britain. You also have some big media competitors to the BBC who are now enjoying the BBC, and may occasionally try to take or steal some market share.

The third thing that’s happening, of course, is the BBC’s business model, which is under enormous pressure at the moment. The licensing fees it receives from British taxpayers may be challenged in the coming years. You know, that’s what makes the BBC unique in Britain. It is the license fee structure. It’s the idea that everyone pays into the system.

This is under real threat now because of this political campaign. But look, when a BBC newsroom makes a self-inflicted, self-inflicted mistake like this, it attracts all the wrong kind of attention to the wider organization. This is what we are seeing now from Trump and everywhere else.

Jeff Bennett:

Can I ask you, based on your reporting, how realistic is the successful libel claim here against the UK public broadcaster?

Brian Stelter:

Not very realistic at all. Whether this suit is brought in the United Kingdom, Florida, or any other US state, Trump likely has a very weak case here. The BBC will have a very strong case in court.

But I guess that’s not really the question. The question is whether the BBC is prepared to risk that, and whether it is prepared to go to court or not. We’ve seen some media companies try to compromise with Trump, trying to get him to go, either by paying his future presidential library or by changing editorial coverage.

This is the big concern I hear from people at the BBC now. Will the company stand up to Trump, try to offer a defense, and reject his demands to retract and apologize? Or will the BBC try to reach some sort of deal, or try to appease him in some way?

I know, Jeff, we’ve covered a lot of these cases this year, and I think what we’ve learned is that when media companies appease, when they appear to give in, there is consumer backlash. Just ask Disney with Jimmy Kimmel.

On the other hand, the BBC has to consider many factors here, including which board members may be more conservative-minded, and of course the future of the license fee system.

Jeff Bennett:

Brian Stelter, CNN Senior Media Analyst Always good to see you.

Brian Stelter:

Thanks.