So, I see that heads have rolled at the BBC, otherwise known as the official state broadcaster of formerly great Britain, for grossly misrepresenting (through a not-so obvious edit) the words of Donald Trump, the great Orange Emperor on the occasion of a speech to his supporters on January 6th. For the moment, I will leave aside the question of whether it is wise for a national government to maintain what is essentially a tax-supported news and entertainment corporation at all. Nine out of ten times, the irresistible temptation will always be for the government in question to demand that the news and entertainment content provided be fashioned and trimmed to the ruling party’s exact specifications. Having an official government broadcasting establishment is what totalitarian states are expected to do, all the better to shape the perceptions of the general public by ensuring that the official media voices are all singing from the same sheet of music, in large and small ways. (Other viewers besides myself long noted that even entertainment programs like Call the Midwife simply had to slip in laudatory mention of the National Health Service … even as the NHS in real life/real time provided worse and worse outcomes.)
Not that our own variously independent broadcasters here in the US have done much better when it comes to covering news and providing entertainment in a fair, non-partisan and even-handed manner. Alas, the proggie woke mind virus has infected most of our own dear media, but appear to have done so without the threat of a governmental hand appearing to squeeze their budget until the pips squeak. Levels of wokery in news and entertainment generally is about the same, but we can comfort ourselves in knowing that eventually, the lack of viewers will dry up the worst offenders in the US. In the meantime, consumers in the US can go to X, to independent specialist blogs, Substack and all the rest. So can Britons, I suppose, but in the States at least we can do it without risking a knock on the door from a policeman wanting to ask us about our recent intemperate social media post and making threatening noises about arrest and conviction for hurty feelings.

When the internet became a widely distributed thing, I was able to read more than just the Guardian Weekly. (I had a gift subscription from a British friend. The Grauniad was leftish then, but not freakishly so.) This meant the London Times, the Spectator, and a handful of others, before most of them put up a paywall and took all the fun out of it for a relatively broke reader, leaving the Daily Mail as my guilty pleasure and peep into all things newsworthy in Britain, including awareness of a series of … scandals, sort-of-scandals, or controversies tarnishing the BBC’s reputation as being an above-the-vulgar-fray provider of news.

If it wasn’t whispers of sexual abuse by one of their long-time personalities (Jimmy Savile – wrap-up link here and here) it was another one of their respected administrators being too closely linked to the collapse of a popular charity. It appeared from some stories that I read, that Mr. Yentob discouraged close examination of the doings of Kids’ Company because of his position on the board and close friendship with the founder/manager/inspiration, Camila Batmanghelidjh – a charming, charismatic woman without a single shred of administrative capability. (Also – a taste for wearing muu-muu outfits and turbans which look like the aftermath of an explosion in a calico factory.) The widely supported and popular charity collapsed under it’s own weight, leaving suppliers and staff unpaid and unemployed, and probably a lot of at-risk children and teens without the support which Kids’ Company had provided them. (An overview and lessons to be learned, here.) Recently – almost at the same time as revelation of Trump’s speech being edited to make it appear that he said something in it that he most emphatically did not – the means by which ace interviewer Martin Bashir scored a tell-all interview with Princess Diana also raised eyebrows. Basically, Mr. Bashir forged documents to maneuver an already desperately unhappy and slightly paranoid woman to spill all to him about her situation. This brought him plaudits initially, but eventually only made it very much worse for the Princess, and for her family … and reflected no credit at all on the BBC. They couldn’t get shed of Mr. Bashir fast enough for the scummy tactics used to get him the interview – but looks as if scummy tactics are the go-to, and the only crime in management eyes is getting caught using them.
Ah, well – not our circus, not our monkeys. Discuss as you will – do you think an established, government funded and managed broadcasting enterprise is better, worse, or about the same as our national for-profit broadcasters.