4 hours ago
9
The BBC is prepared to formally apologise to Donald Trump as part of its efforts to resolve his billion-dollar legal threat over its editing of one of his speeches, the Guardian understands.
However, figures at the corporation are also minded to be robust in defending its journalism in the face of allegations from Trump that it made “false, defamatory, disparaging, and inflammatory statements” about him.
The BBC’s leadership is facing a looming deadline over how to reply to the Trump legal threat, filed in a Florida court. It follows the editing of a Trump speech in an edition of Panorama, which was a significant factor in the resignation of director general Tim Davie and Deborah Turness, its head of news.
Beyond a fresh apology, a critical question remains how far the BBC goes in defending its reporting more generally in the US, given claims from Trump’s allies that it publishes “fake news” in relation to him.
Its legal team has been drawing up its response to the complaint. It relates to an edition of Panorama broadcast last year, which spliced together clips of a Trump speech made on 6 January 2021. It has been accused of making it appear that he directly encouraged the US Capitol attack later that day.
The spliced clip suggested that Trump told the crowd: “We’re going to walk down to the Capitol and I’ll be there with you, and we fight. We fight like hell.” The words were taken from sections of his speech almost an hour apart.
The Guardian understands that given an apology for the edit has been made by the BBC’s chair, Samir Shah, senior figures see no reason why a more personal apology cannot be made to the president in its official response to the legal threat. The corporation has concluded that the edit “gave the impression that President Trump had made a direct call for violent action”.
People familiar with the discussions over how to respond also said the apology meant it could push back at any wider criticisms of its journalism of the US in relation to the coverage of Trump. A US congressional committee found that Trump failed to act to stop his supporters from attacking the Capitol.
Should Trump pursue legal action, the BBC leadership faces an invidious choice over a public battle with the US president or making a payment that will be seen as politically toxic, given it is publicly funded through the licence fee.
The BBC does have insurance covering legal challenges to its journalism. However, insiders acknowledge that there is always a pressure on legal costs should litigation stretch on for months.
Trump has doubled down on his legal threat, stating he felt he had “an obligation” to sue the BBC. “I guess I have to,” he told Fox News. “They defrauded the public and they’ve admitted it. This is within one of our great allies, supposedly our great ally.”
He added: “They showed me the results of how they butchered it up. It was very dishonest and the head man quit and a lot of the other people quit.”
after newsletter promotion
Legal experts have questioned the Trump team’s chances of victory in any court case, given Florida’s liberal libel laws and the fact the Panorama episode was not available in the state. The broadcast was too long ago to take legal action in the UK. Trump would also have to prove he was damaged by the programme.
Trump has regularly been using lawsuits to attack criticism in the media, with several major networks opting to settle claims with one eye on their commercial interests. Trump also has outstanding cases against the New York Times and the Wall Street Journal.
The edit was one of the criticisms of the BBC raised in a memo by Michael Prescott, a former independent external adviser to the BBC’s editorial guidelines and standards committee. He left the role in the summer.
There is anger within the BBC over the Trump edit. However, there is also concern over the political nature of the Prescott memo, which outlines a series of claims of liberal bias relating to issues emerging over several years. The BBC has said some of the issues are historical, while serious action has already been taken in relation to others.
Prescott has said he had no political motivations in raising his concerns.
