How populist attacks on BBC are motivated by an Orwellian desire to hide the truth
By reporting what is actually happening, the BBC is an enemy of populist authoritarians whose route to power lies in trashing the truth and creating their own alternative facts
Donald Trump will never describe the best broadcaster in the world as the “Big Beautiful Beeb” – but the British people should, and with pride. Suing the BBC for up to $5 billion for a bad edit of one of his speeches seems excessive, even acknowledging the US President’s sensitivities.
However, Trump’s world revolves around litigation. Universities, broadcasters, museums and political opponents in the US have been at the sharp end of his wrath over alleged slights against him and his policies.
Trump’s current focus on Ukraine has seen the BBC row take a back seat, for now. But this was never just about Trump’s ego or capacity for revenge. This is unashamedly political.
His friendships with Keir Starmer and King Charles mask serious attempts to undermine this country by helping the right of the Conservative party, his close political ally Nigel Farage and Reform UK, adding to the war of words by Elon Musk and JD Vance.
The BBC’s crucial role
Populists, at home and abroad, are attacking our laws, policing and freedom of speech at every turn, while undermining Britain’s relationship with the European Union in order to frustrate attempts to rejoin.
Amid all of this, the BBC plays a crucial role as a broadcaster of overwhelming importance and an enemy of populist authoritarians whose only way forward is to trash the truth, project alternative facts, dismiss fair and balanced reporting, surrender to the Wild West nature of much of our social media, and inject their own bias at every turn. New tech oligarchs continue to dominate messaging and information in order to distort reality, spread division and undermine democracy.
That said, the BBC is not immune to criticism especially in the sphere of governance where recent events have exposed significant weaknesses in the way it is run. A lack of swift action over errors of judgment can see them fester and become worse.
Within the corporation, loyalty is crucial but there must be much more vigorous lines of accountability and redress when mistakes are made. However, those making claims of systemic bias and declining editorial standards should be viewed with caution – beware wolves in sheep’s clothing!
A source of hope in times of war
It’s worth looking briefly at the early history of this unique organisation. The corporation has long been an anchor of reasonableness amid a deep sea of lies, distortion and fake news.
It is a national treasure, and a reminder of the values shared by a country which fought wars to remain free. In the darker days of the Second World War, it was a source of morale, pride, and hope. And, for the vast majority of British people, this remains the case.
The BBC’s first radio broadcast went out on November 14, 1922, after the British Broadcasting Company was formed with the 6ft 6in John Reith, an engineer by profession, at the helm. A dour Scot, born in Stonehaven, he became the first director-general of the renamed British Broadcasting Corporation in 1927, and proclaimed that its public service mission was to inform, educate and entertain.
Today the licence fee, based on a Royal Charter and paid by the public, makes up nearly 70 per cent of its income. Finance is provided by the government for the BBC World Service, another flagship.
Churchill versus the BBC
Power-struggles between politicians and broadcasters have shaped the BBC over the years. Reith had always promoted the idea of public service broadcasting as an independent entity, separate from government control. But Winston Churchill, arguing it should be on the side of government, was angered by the BBC’s failure to “mobilise” against the 1926 General Strike.
In his book, Live From Downing Street, Nick Robinson explained the depth of the ill-feeling between the two men. “Even when Churchill was dead, Reith refused to walk past his commemorative plaque in the floor of Westminster Abbey,” he wrote. “The feeling had been mutual. Churchill referred to the puritanical Scot, who towered over him, as ‘that Wuthering Height’, and wrote: ‘I absolutely hate him.’”
Robinson concluded that “these two gigantic egos were always likely to collide spectacularly. Both men had enormous self-belief and very little self-doubt.”
Reith continued to defend the idea of public service broadcasting as an independent entity separate from government control. This early crisis for the BBC may have helped shape its future and set the tone for the way it manages political pressure to this day.
But Churchill possibly had the last laugh, with the monopoly position enjoyed by the BBC ending in 1954, an idea that Churchill, the then Prime Minister, worked hard to achieve.
A ‘shared reality’
The BBC’s tough stand against government control may have attracted George Orwell to work for the BBC from 1941 to 1943, although he later said it had been a waste of time and found the BBC to be “halfway between a girl’s school and a lunatic asylum”. But he commended the freedom of speech they gave him, saying “on no occasion have I been compelled to say on air anything that I would not say as a private individual”.
In a 2017 speech, Professor Jean Seaton, director of The Orwell Foundation, said: “Everything Orwell ever wrote is an extended polemic of seeing the truth, however ugly, in ourselves. Perhaps this was a product also of the war – but seems to me a mark of democratic principle. The breaking down of the barriers between people and nations depends for Orwell on a shared reality. Surely that is the object of the BBC.”
So when populists stir the pot of discontent about paying the licence fee, we should remember why the BBC has so many political critics. It stands for everything they despise.
Their playbook may be dominating politics across the world, but truth is anathema to populists. If the BBC didn’t exist, we’d need to invent it.
Henry McLeish is a former First Minister of Scotland
Comments
Want to join the conversation? Please or to comment on this article.