The BBC has a crucial role to play refereeing Brexit. But at the moment our national broadcaster isn’t blowing the whistle on inaccurate pro-Brexit dogma often enough. Here are five examples of how it’s letting the public down.
Not enough challenge
On yesterday’s Today programme, Jeremy Hunt was allowed to claim Theresa May had “got a fantastic agreement which met all our red lines” in Brussels the previous week. (From 1:51:00). He repeated this, spelling out what those red lines were: “control of our money, our borders, our laws”. May has U-turned on all those red lines in some way since negotiations began.
Justin Webb let the comments pass unchallenged. Maybe the issue was the format – a 10-minute segment in which the usually robust presenter clearly wanted to talk about the NHS and Tory rebellion in parliament, rather than go over old ground. Nevertheless, time-pressed presenters must find a way to stamp on inaccurate or misleading statements fast when they pop up.
Ignoring Brexit entirely
On Tuesday the BBC website ran a lengthy story about inflation, which had risen to 3.1%, but not once did it mention either Brexit or the slump in the pound after the referendum. The fall in sterling has pushed up the price of imports and is a central reason why inflation has jumped from just 0.5% last June, the month of the referendum.
Not calling out fake ‘facts’
James Dyson was interviewed last month by Andrew Marr. The inventor rattled off at least three factual inaccuracies: that the EU was the slowest growing area in the world; that hard Brexit was “not a problem” for companies’ supply chains; and that the government has “plenty of room” to compensate its exporters after Brexit. Marr didn’t challenge him on any.
Bigging up the Brextremists
Since the referendum, the BBC seems to have decided the fight is now between hard and soft Brexit. As a result there’s a revolving door to their current affairs shows for minor-league Brexiters – John Redwood, Owen Patterson, Bernard Jenkins, Kate Hoey. Those who still argue Brexit must be stopped barely get a look in.
Last August Patrick Minford claimed a hard Brexit would boost the economy by £135 billion per year. The BBC report referred to a “report” by Minford’s group, Economists for Free Trade. But the report hadn’t even been published, so his working couldn’t be checked. The BBC nevertheless made it the main story on its website’s news homepage.
Buying the government’s line
Last month Radio 4’s PM programme reported on the government’s unwillingness to hand over more than 50 impact assessments to parliament (from 01:30, then 05:30). The government said the documents contained “material that might undercut the UK’s negotiating position”.
The programme reported this largely as fact. Its main report included the line “according to the government” in passing, but its news bulletin didn’t even have that. This should have been challenged. Indeed, Davis has since said that there were never any impact assessments.
With Brexit looking shakier than ever, the BBC needs to up its game.
Responding to InFacts’ enquiries about these stories and its Brexit coverage more generally, the BBC said that it “continues to report Brexit impartially, ensuring a balance across our news coverage and hearing a wide range of different perspectives. Our journalists are best in class when it comes to reporting independently and without fear or favour. It is one of the reasons why the public trusts the BBC more than any other source of news.”
Correction: The original version of this article wrongly identified Nick Robinson as the presenter who interviewed Jeremy Hunt. It was in fact Justin Webb. We apologise for the error.
