Apology needed

The BBC’S director of editorial policy justified the decision of the corporation’s editorial complaints unit to rebuke Naga Munchetty because she discussed a possible motive

for Donald Trump publishing his racist views.

During the exchange between presenters Dan Walker and Naga Munchetty, the white man acknowledged that the woman of colour, as she describes herself, was reluctant to comment on her personal feelings but pressed her to do so.

The male presenter then asked a very leading question, suggesting a possible motive,

The Scotsman welcomes letters for publication – 300 words maximum – from all sides of public debate. Include date and page when referring to an article, avoid ‘Letters to the Editor in e-mail subject line. No attachments. We reserve the right to edit letters. Send submissions, with full address and phone number, to:

❚ lettersts@scotsman.com ❚ The Editor, The Scotsman, 30 Queensferry Road, Edinburgh EH4 2HS;

to which the woman replied “Yes” before she insisted that they move on to another topic.

Even if editorial guidelines had been breached, it is difficult to fathom why only the woman of colour was singled out for rebuke. Further explanation from the BBC was that the complaint it received singled out only one presenter, so the actions of the other were not considered.

In that case, rather than continuing to try to justify its earlier decision, the simple way to resolve the issue would be for the BBC to agree it was wrong, to acknowledge that the presenter was led on and boxed in by her co-presenter and that she is due an apology from the corporation.

KEN STEWART Juniper Green, Edinburgh