What does the BBC do when it ends up in hot water? Until now, the answer has always been to commission an inquiry and then apologise, with added hand-wringing. This time, however, the buck stops at the top.

BBC Director General Tim Davie and BBC News CEO Deborah Turness have this evening announced their resignations in the wake of an impartiality scandal. Former journalist Michael Prescott had compiled a dossier — details of which were published by the Telegraph this week — highlighting serious breaches of neutrality. Examples include the editing of a Donald Trump speech for an episode of Panorama which warped the meaning of the US President’s words, as well as coverage of the Israel-Hamas conflict, transgender issues and climate change.

In recent years, the BBC has quietly stopped doing what it once did best: rigorous investigations of topics that are of national importance. Certain contentious subjects, of which gender ideology is just one, have not had the benefit of the “both sides” treatment.

The corporation needs to get back to its fearless and robust roots. In 2007, I took part in an episode of Hecklers, a series in which an invited guest argued a “provocative thesis” to a studio audience. The format was serious and debate-focused, tackling weighty subjects such as the Iraq War and prison abolitionism. My argument was that “sex change operations are unnecessary mutilation”, and I faced four opponents who were all experts in the field. It is fair to say that every single point of view from both sides of this debate was fully aired and tested.

In 2017, I was invited onto Woman’s Hour to discuss my book on the global sex trade, in which I laid bare the horrors of prostitution. When they saw the item advertised, there was such a kerfuffle from pro-prostitution lobby groups that the BBC simply gave a slot to the English Collective of Prostitutes the following day, to balance things out. These days, the corporation would be more likely to either avoid the topic altogether or not invite me, because the “sex work is work” lobby shouts louder than the feminists.

The problem is, once you let one group of activists dictate the terms, it opens the door for others. Since 2013 the BBC style guide has stipulated the use of “preferred pronouns”, which has led to “woman exposes her penis to children”-type reporting. This guide must change. It must emphasise accuracy and rigorous fact-checking rather than posturing and capitulation to the latest trend. The valiant “Seen in Journalism” group has made several attempts to persuade the BBC to report accurately rather than ideologically; maybe now the resignations of Davie and Turness will prompt a rethink.

These days, in the event that lesbians, gay men, or trans-identified staff face discrimination, there are plenty of mechanisms in place to address it. As a result, the formation of LGBTQ networks at the corporation is unnecessary and promotes tribalism. And it is both unwise and unprofessional of the BBC to appoint correspondents to represent particular “communities”; indeed, its gender and identity correspondent recently came under fire for the lack of neutrality in her reporting.

Davie and Turness’s resignations are hardly surprising in the wake of rows over Gary Lineker, Bob Vylan at Glastonbury, and the Gaza documentary which failed to mention its narrator was a child of senior Hamas operatives. Perhaps this moment will mark a fresh start, but that will require the corporation to stop kowtowing to activists. We need balance, and scrutiny of both sides is a necessary prerequisite. The BBC should be brave enough to recognise that being scared of a bunch of loud-mouthed activists is not in keeping with the tradition upon which it was founded.

---

Julie Bindel is an investigative journalist, author, and feminist campaigner. Her latest book is Lesbians: Where are we now? She also writes on Substack.

bindelj

---