'Defending the indefensible': how BBC ruling sparked Trump race row
The race row currently engulfing the BBC began on the cosy set of a breakfast TV sofa and evolved into a plotline some have described as being beyond even the mockumentary series W1A.
The corporation’s decision to uphold a complaint against the BBC Breakfast presenter Naga Munchetty has attracted widespread condemnation from prominent black actors and broadcasters; the corporation’s staff are reportedly bewildered, confused and angry; and there are calls for the decision to be reversed. But, amid the din of protest, the BBC is digging in.
“They have got themselves in a right mess,” said the Channel 4 News presenter Krishnan Guru-Murthy. “They are defending the indefensible.”
The controversy was sparked by an exchange between Breakfast co-hosts Dan Walker and Munchetty on 17 July. Discussing a news item about Donald Trump’s comments that four congresswomen of colour should “go home”, Walker asked his co-host how she felt.
Munchetty replied: “Every time I have been told, as a woman of colour, to go back to where I came from, that was embedded in racism. Now, I’m not accusing anyone of anything here, but you know what certain phrases mean.”
When further prompted by Walker about how that made her feel, she added: “Absolutely furious, and I can imagine lots of people in this country will be feeling absolutely furious a man in that position thinks it’s OK to skirt the lines by using language like that.”
Following a complaint, the BBC’s executive complaints unit (ECU) ruled Munchetty had breached its editorial guidelines. Though Trump’s remarks were “widely condemned as racist”, the guidelines “do not allow for journalists to … give their opinions about the individual making the remarks or their motives for doing so – in this case President Trump,” the ECU explained.
In a letter to the complainant, the BBC said “audiences should not be able to tell” the opinions of its journalists on matters of public policy.
Guru-Murthy described the decision as “very perplexing”, especially in the context of what “mostly older, white men are allowed to say on TV and Twitter, day in, day out”.
“So, you can say something is racist, but you shouldn’t infer that the person who said the racist thing is racist. And you can call something a lie, but you mustn’t call the person who said that lie a liar. It’s just ridiculous. Racism is not something we debate.
“The idea that the BBC doesn’t allow its presenters and journalists to routinely adopt a set of values is nonsense. Whether it’s terrorism, racism, genocide or disease, it is assumed in the course of their journalism, their interviewing, their questioning and their scripting, that these are bad things. Yet, racism is something you mustn’t allow the audiences to know what you think
about?
“It’s very important that the BBC understand what it’s got wrong about this.”
The actor Colin Salmon, one of 40 prominent black actors and broadcasters to sign an open letter in the Guardian calling for the decision to be overturned, said the BBC, “by upholding the complaint, has sent a clear message that they have no genuine interest in, or understanding of, everyday racism and its effect on their employees or the wider public”.
The broadcaster Marcus Ryder, who worked for the BBC for 24 years, believes the decision suggests there is a “serious lack of diversity” in the corporation and, if the fallout is not handled properly, could have a “seriously negative effect on BAME staff”.
“If the most senior levels of management do not respond publicly to the decision, it may well have a seriously negative effect on the BBC’s reputation and credibility, vis-a-vis parts of its audience for years to come,” Ryder wrote in a blog responding to the decision.
“The BBC as a ‘national broadcaster’ that represents the people – as opposed to a ‘state broadcaster’ that represents the government – is built on the bond of trust between itself and its audience. This decision weakens that bond,” wrote Ryder, who is now the chief international editor of CGTN Digital, the global arm of China’s state TV network.
Diane Coyle, a former vice-chair of the BBC Trust, tweeted her support for Ryder’s position. “I agree with this post entirely including the point about unprecedented private anger and public disagreement from BBC staff (not just BAME)”.
Pat Younge, a former chief creative officer for BBC TV production, said there was a lot of talk at the BBC about diversity and inclusion. “Diversity is about inviting black people to the party. But inclusion is actually dancing with them,” he said, adding that the decision suggested the BBC “hasn’t really looked at what they do with a more diverse workforce”.
“They need to do a reset,” said Younge, who now runs the independent production company Sugar Films. “The BBC has to start acting like a more inclusive organisation. Only Naga can respond to Dan in that way, with that learned experience. A white presenter can’t. So if you want what these people bring to the table, you have to look at how your value systems work.”
Ben de Pear, the editor of Channel 4 News, tweeted: “If we’re honest in broadcasting a lack of diversity at senior levels in executive and editorial boards means stupid decisions will be made – especially if management don’t change or listen to all their staff. If you really fight stupid decisions can be reversed.”