I'm watching the developing crisis at the BBC with some concern, but I must say that I am not all that surprised. In my own limited contact with the BBC over editorial standards, relating to my complaint about that absurd 2021 "Lost Circle" TV programme, I am appalled by the arrogance and complacency with which my comments were greeted. First of all, putting in a formal complaint was not that easy. It was initially not accepted by the BBC, which led to my making the complaint to Ofcom, who then shunted it back to the BBC. In 2022 I provided even more detail about the nonsense contained within the programme, and the demonstrable falseness of many of the claims made by MPP and Alice Roberts, At that time the programme had been broadcast six times. The BBC replied:
".....we've received no information that would lead us to form the view that the film can't be shown again." As I have pointed out before, that was extremely arrogant and complacent. The BBC did not ask for proof associated with my complaint, and they were clearly not prepared to check things out for themselves.
As of November 2025, the programme has been broadcast on multiple occasions (at least 14), including a showing on BBC Four just a few days ago. It has also been continuously available for streaming since it was first shown in 2021. It is still promoted on Alice Roberts's Wikipedia page, which also quotes her as saying: "science is about evidence, not wishful thinking". Hmmmmm......
That notorious programme, based entirely on assumptions and speculations dressed up as responsible and reliable science, falls far short of the standards expected of the BBC. In my view it brings the BBC into disrepute, and I have said this many times before on this blog.
What makes things even more ironic is the latest BBC PR campaign, including lots of hype about "BBC Verify". The corporation claims a commitment to the unvarnished truth on everything, to the extent that they ruthlessly strip out material that may be classified as misinformation or disinformation. Well, they do nothing of the sort. On the basis of my own experience, I can say that they make editorial decisions on the basis of "impact" and financial benefit, not on the basis of hard science or factual reliability. And when broadcast nonsense is pointed out to them, they go straight into defensive mode, trotting out platitudes such as that which I have quoted above.
Not good enough, BBC. But it's rather sad that it takes a threat from that idiot in the White House Ballroom to force the Corporation to face up to its complacency and its highly defective editorial decision making processes.
George Orwell's "1984" and its Ministry of Truth again springs to mind ( with its leader played on TV by [ the sadly alcoholic ] actor Richard Burton.
ReplyDeleteSadly I have serious reservations about BBC endorsement of the girl (oldish lady) with the interesting colour hair. BBC needs to decide whether it is an entertainment resource or an information resource. Currently it does neither with the aspired excellence.
ReplyDeleteThe lady in question pretends to be an academic while ignoring evidence staring her in the face to maintain a populist narrative. BBC reporting on several crucial matters - EU, say - has been sadly lacking in recent years.
Currently the BBC is under attack from the right wing dogmatists and I hope BBC will resist and rediscover their mission. We sorely need a reliable source of information with critical science based editorial oversight,
I say this having tested various AI tools in recent weeks. The tools are indispensable but regularly wrong. We need humans to interpret and the BBC is the only entity I know able to rise to the challenge - theoretically at least. Brian's post is pointing a well deserved finger.
The lady is not ill-intentioned and has a living to make but she is letting herself and all of us down with her positioning.