“Let the healing begin” proclaimed Boris Johnson in his first speech outside 10 Downing Street after winning re-election. It is a fine sentiment. But it is evidently not one the new British government extends to the BBC. On the contrary, the prime minister’s aides have let it be known that government ministers will boycott the BBC’s flagship Today programme, in punishment for its alleged bias against the Conservatives and hostility to Brexit. This churlish decision has been combined with threats to the BBC’s funding.
At a time when even many of Mr Johnson’s foes are keen to believe that the prime minister is sincere in his talk of national reconciliation, his aides’ threats to the BBC send the opposite signal. They raise fears that the Johnson government will be intolerant of scrutiny, hostile to independent institutions and willing to use its power to shut down criticism.
Defending the BBC’s independence does not mean suggesting that the corporation is beyond criticism, or that it should not be open to reform. There are legitimate questions to be asked about whether the BBC’s current funding model is still appropriate. A compulsory licence fee, paid by every TV owner in the country, looks anachronistic in the age of Netflix and Amazon. It is also worth questioning whether it is right to use scarce resources prosecuting those who fail to pay the fee.
But when the government combines legitimate questions about the future of broadcasting with crude, partisan attacks on the BBC, it immediately raises questions about its motives. What should be the beginning of a careful debate about a great national institution quickly begins to look like an attempt to bully the media.
It should also be underlined that the Tories’ complaints about BBC bias are largely specious. Of course, there will be examples of shoddy journalism in the thousands of hours of news coverage churned out by the BBC. But there is no evidence of systematic bias against the Conservatives or Brexit.
The BBC is not alone. Ministers have boycotted a show on the BBC’s commercial rival Sky News after a presenter decided to “empty chair” the Conservative Party chairman. Tory aides muttered about reviewing the licence of Channel 4, a public service broadcaster, after it replaced the absent prime minister with an ice-sculpture in a climate debate.
The BBC has experienced assaults from angry politicians in the past. The official history of the corporation in the 1980s is entitled “Pinkoes and Traitors” — which just about summarised the Thatcher government’s view. The Beeb came through the turbulent 1980s intact, and later had clashes with Tony Blair’s New Labour government.
The international context this time feels different and more threatening. The free press is under pressure. “Fake news”, a term popularised by Donald Trump, is now an accusation hurled at independent journalism from Turkey to Brazil. In the US itself, the media has become hopelessly split along partisan lines, poisoning political debate.
Britain has thus far avoided US-style hyper-partisanship. This is in large part thanks to the BBC, which still dominates UK political coverage, while arguing it is possible to provide a forum for non-partisan news, in which all sides are given a fair hearing.
This ideal of open debate is more important than ever in an era when social media encourages people to stay inside their own political bubbles, and to dismiss all discordant stories as “fake news”. If the Johnson government now goes after the BBC in a spirit of partisan spite it will not heal Britain’s wounds. It will deepen them.
