Dear Tony
Thank you for your letter of March 19th. I note that a similar letter was
sent to Gavyn Davies, the Chairman of the BBC, and a longer version was sent
by Alastair Campbell to our Director of News, Richard Sambrook. They will
also be replying.
Firstly, and I do not mean to be rude, but having faced the biggest ever
public demonstration in this country and the biggest ever backbench
rebellion against a sitting government by its own supporters, would you not
agree that your communications advisors are not best placed to advise
whether or not the BBC has got the balance right between support and
dissent? Given these circumstances they are hardly in a position to make a
reasoned judgment about the BBC’s impartiality.
You have been engaged in a difficult battle fighting for your particular
view of the world to be accepted and, quite understandably, you want that to
be reported. We however have a different role in society. Our role in these
circumstances is to try to give a balanced picture.
It is perfectly legitimate for you or your advisors to complain about
particular stories — journalism is an imperfect profession — and if we make
mistakes as we inevitably do, under my leadership we will always say we were
wrong and apologise. However, for you to question the whole of the BBC’s
journalistic output across a wide range of radio, television and online
services because you are concerned about particular stories which don’t
favour your view is unfair.
I believe we have made major efforts to ensure that the issues and events
surrounding Iraq have been properly reported. Let me explain how we have
done that.
Some weeks ago I set up and chaired an ad hoc committee which included
all the most senior editorial figures at the BBC in order to discuss our
coverage of the Iraq issue.
It was that committee which decided to prevent any senior editorial
figures at the BBC from going on the anti-war march; it was that committee
which insisted that we had to find a balanced audience for programmes like
Question Time at a time when it was very hard to find supporters of the war
willing to come on; and it was that same committee which, when faced with a
massive bias against the war amongst phone-in callers, decided to increase
the number of phone lines so that pro-war listeners had a better chance of
getting through and getting onto the programmes. All this was done in an
attempt to ensure our coverage was balanced.
That same committee has discussed on a number of occasions whether or not
our reports from Baghdad needed to be qualified. Until yesterday we have
been of the opinion that our journalism has not been restricted in a way
which required qualification as a matter of course and even yesterday, after
the war started, our reporters did not have Iraqi “minders” and were free to
move around the city. At no point has their copy been checked before being
broadcast.
My point is that we have discussed these sorts of issues at length and
made the best judgments we could. That our conclusions didn’t always please
Alastair is unfortunate but not our primary concern.
You quote a number of instances where you believe your position has not
been fairly reported. I could easily quote an equal number where the
opposite applied but this would be a pointless discussion. I can only assure
you that under my leadership I will do everything in my power to defend the
BBC’s fairness, independence and impartiality. My committee is now meeting
on a daily basis and we discuss the reporting of the Iraq issue every
morning.
Finally I enclose a CD of a special programme which was broadcast on
Radio Four and shows only too well that we fully understand the reality of
life in Baghdad and have tried to make our listeners aware of it.
I appreciate the fact that your letter was private. I, too, have no
intention of making this reply public.
Best wishes
Greg Dyke
