In my post for April 19, I put up the letter I sent to the BBC complaining about its failure to challenge the constant lies trotted out by pro-Brexit speakers. I particulary wanted to know why BBC interviewers never ask:
1. Why should we have to obey the result of a referendum that was won by lying, cheating and criminality?
2. Why should we have to obey the result of a referendum in which voters were promised a Brexit that is not being and cannot be delivered?
3. Why are we pretending we have to obey the result of a referendum that was explicitly non-binding and advisory?
I received a reply which did not address any of these points:
Dear Mr Withington
Thank you for contacting the BBC.
I understand you feel BBC News has shown a consistent bias in favour of Brexit and failed to properly question the assertions of those who are in favour of Brexit.
Naturally we regret when any member of our audience is unhappy with any aspect of what we do. We have received a wide range of feedback about our coverage of this story across our news programmes and bulletins. Keeping in mind pressures on licence fee resources, this response seeks to address the key points raised. That said, we apologise in advance if your complaint has not been specifically addressed here.
We aim to cover the ongoing Brexit negotiations with due impartiality. This means we carry a wide range of views about the European Union from across the political spectrum on our output.
We approach the story with the required level of impartiality, with input from various commentators and experts. 'Feedback' on BBC Radio 4 has addressed the issue of complaints about how we cover the story. Our Chief Political Adviser and the controller of the BBC's daily news programming joined Today presenter Nick Robinson, to discuss the common complaints from all sides. You may be interested in the sections at 3mins and 13mins especially:
As with any story we cover, BBC News does not have an opinion on the European Union, or on the UK’s position within it. Instead we try to explain the different and sometimes complex issues affecting our audience during Brexit. Our aim is to give them the information they need in order to follow the process clearly.
We appreciate your concerns and hope this helps to explain how we approach our reporting of this subject. Nonetheless, I understand this is something you feel strongly about and I’ve included your points on our audience feedback report that is sent to senior management and programme makers each morning and ensures that your complaint has been seen by the right people quickly. This helps inform their decisions about current and future output.
We appreciate you taking the time to register your views on this matter as it is greatly helpful in informing future decisions at the BBC.
Thanks again for getting in touch.
BBC Complaints Team
I have now complained about this response as follows:
I made a very specific complaint about how interviews with
Brexit supporters are conducted on BBC programmes, and about how interviewers
appear to constantly suppress crucial facts. I asked you whether this was
because they were ignorant or because they were instructed not to raise certain
issues inconvenient for the Brexit case. I also asked you if there was an
instruction, from whom did it come.
You did not address any of these points, and instead
delivered a standard, generic response claiming: 'we try to be fair'. The key
points are below. I would be grateful if this time you address them.
Day after day, Brexit supporters are allowed to spout that
the UK has to leave the EU because 'people voted for it'. (Most of them have by
now given up any pretence that Brexit has any benefits.)
I used to work for the BBC as well as other broadcasting
organisations, and I would have been asking these interviewees:
1. Why should we have to obey the result of a referendum
that was won by lying, cheating and criminality?
2. Why should we have to obey the result of a referendum in
which voters were promised a Brexit that is not being and cannot be delivered?
3. Why are we pretending we have to obey the result of a
referendum that was explicitly non-binding and advisory?
I have heard many, many Brexiters being interviewed on your
programmes, but I have NEVER heard one of your interviewers putting these
points. Why is that? Is it because they are ignorant of the facts or is it
because an edict has come from on high forbidding them from raising these
inconvenient facts. If it is the latter, from whom does it come?