IIf you made up your mind about the BBC when the Indian government recently attacked it for airing a documentary about Narendra Modi’s role in the 2002 Gujarat riots, then hold on a moment.
Perhaps you believe that the BBC is part of an evil white media conspiracy whose members wake up every day and immediately start thinking of ways to defame India. Or perhaps you think of the BBC as a largely impartial media organization committed to exploring all reasonable points of view no matter who commits the crime.
Either way, forget about your own prejudices and preconceptions because this whole past week the BBC has been involved in its own peril of – what else? – Fairness. And the corporation hasn’t come out of it well. The way the controversy has progressed could have consequences for the broadcast and for journalists around the world.
To understand why the fight can affect us all, even if the original context was entirely domestic, try and think of an Indian parallel: should a journalist employed by an Indian news organization have to delete his Twitter account? Should be seen as an extension of your employer’s personality?
Most of us would say: don’t be ridiculous.
And really, that’s the way our country works. Almost every journalist I know tweets freely without regard for how their employers will react. News anchors, like other human beings, hold political views. They may remain neutral (in theory, at least) when they’re moderating TV debates, but they don’t keep their own views a secret when they’re not on camera. And by and large news organizations get it right. (Though there have been one or two worrying exceptions recently.)
Sometimes these political views are in line with their employers’ views (especially if they are pro-government) and may even lead to a promotion or at least a pay raise. But hardly anyone has been reprimanded for tweeting about the independence of the Supreme Court, attacking the Karnataka government over corruption, or asking for bail to former Delhi Deputy Chief Minister Manish Sisodia.
There can be problems if these views are expressed in the newspaper or TV channel the journalists work for, but Twitter is generally considered a private space. No one expects journalists to not have their own views, which they express in their personal forums.
This is not true of BBC. If you’re a TV news anchor, you can’t tweet or express your views about a political controversy.
This is due to the unique nature of the BBC’s charter. Although it is funded by the British government (via license fees from citizens), it is not subject to government control (like Doordarshan, for example). It has its own Board of Directors which functions autonomously. Not all governments are happy about this and the BBC is under constant attack, regularly accused of favoritism and threatened with restricting its funding.
Given the level of pressure, the BBC asks its journalists not to present political opinions on social media, lest they be perceived as a sign of favoritism by the government of the day.
So, while Indian TV anchors can (and do) express themselves freely on Twitter, BBC anchors are prohibited from doing so.
Read also: 3 reasons why the Modi government ordered the IT raid on the BBC – none of them make sense
How does the BBC work in control
Pressure on the BBC has traditionally come from Britain’s two largest parties. When Tony Blair was prime minister, his powerful media ally Alastair Campbell waged war against the BBC and the government ousted its director general, Greg Dyke. In recent years, there has been pressure from the Conservative government, which is committed to strangling the BBC.
The Conservatives appointed Richard Sharp as chairman of the BBC. Sharpe, a contributor to the Conservative Party, reportedly helped former Prime Minister Boris Johnson with his finances. The current Director General Tim Davey is a marketing man rather than a journalist and is a former Conservative candidate who was appointed during the Conservative regime.
While Johnson and his BBC-baiting ministerial sidekicks such as the inscrutable Nadine Dorries are now out of office, and Rishi Sunak is less keen to persecute the BBC, the pressure has not entirely eased. And last week, it came to a head when former England captain Gary Lineker, who is the BBC’s chief football commentator, tweeted about the Conservative government’s immigration policy.
There is no major influx. We take in very few refugees compared to other major European countries. This is an extremely cruel policy directed at the most vulnerable in a language not dissimilar to the language used by Germany in the 30s, and I’m out of order?
— Gary Lineker 💙💛 (@GaryLineker) March 7, 2023
Lineker, who has done much to help refugees in his personal capacity, was concerned that the government’s attacks on refugees and “illegal” immigrants were being framed in language reminiscent of 1930s Germany . His post angered the government. No one knows how much (if any) pressure was exerted but the BBC react Taking Lineker off the air.
The BBC explained that it has guidelines that prevent journalists from expressing political views. But the corporation’s own rulebook states that these guidelines apply primarily to news people. A football anchor or a judge of a dance competition should not be put on the same level.
Furthermore, Gary Lineker is not an employee of the BBC. He is a freelancer. Were the guidelines fully applicable to them?
Furthermore, there have been instances where freelancers hosting non-political BBC shows have made political statements to which the Corporation had no objection. Lineker himself had previously tweeted against former Labor leader Jeremy Corbyn and the BBC did not object.
Read also: The BBC is swimming in toxic waters. it is really necessary to be fair in order to survive
Why the BBC case matters to us all
How the issue was resolved was important to journalists everywhere. For example, although I write this column for ThePrint, I am a freelancer. Will Shekhar Gupta have the right to approve all my tweets before they go out? Will happen Hindustan Times, for which I also write columns? Will my food writing stop me from tweeting anything political?
Another difficulty was for the BBC. When the Indian government complained that it was unfair to Narendra Modi, the corporation responded by supporting the freedom of its journalists. Can it now be said that he delighted in being brave when it came to embarrassing a foreign leader, but buckled under pressure when it came to his own leaders?
In the end, the BBC relented, not out of any sense of morality but because Lineker’s allies stood by him and refused to appear on TV. Linekar has been reinstated and now there is talk of revisiting the guidelines.
We remain primarily a country of tolerant, welcoming and generous people. Thank you. ❤️ 4/4
— Gary Lineker 💙💛 (@GaryLineker) March 13, 2023
But if journalists were to lose this battle, the consequences could be disastrous. We would have lost the right to express our views anywhere by selling our soul to our employers. If we protested, we would be told “But so does the BBC.”
In the end, while this was a victory for journalists, it reminded us that all over the world, freedom of expression is coming under attack from politicians and overbearing media owners.
And if the global pressure keeps up, it’s a battle journalists may be losing. And the politicians and the bully boys will win.
Vir Shanghvi is a print and television journalist and talk show host. He tweeted @virsangvi. Thoughts are personal.
(Edited by Prashant)