Ratings can never be worth losing the trust of the public THE BBC

0 Comments | Sunday Herald, The, Jul 22, 2007

WHEN the BBC's coat of arms was formally adopted in 1927 its governors took very seriously what was contained in its design. Two eagles standing either side of the shield have bugles suspended from their necks to represent the "public service" element of the BBC's remit. The motto on the design states that"nation shall speak peace unto nation".

The corporation continually spends millions of pounds to update its graphic image so that it doesn't look old and tired. But occasionally those in charge of its programmes, its producers, should be reminded of what the BBC stands for. "Producer shall speak unto assistant producer and researcher" might be an update worthy of serious consideration next time round.

At the moment "public service" looks to be the least of the production worries at the Beeb. The eagles on the coat of arms could represent fly-away ethics as it struggles to deal with scandals of fakery and phone-in swindles on programmes ranging from Blue Peter to Comic Relief.

But it would be a mistake to brand a massive national organisation the size of the BBC as being riddled with problems. More revelations are likely to follow as Mark Thompson, the BBC's director general, delves further into a worrying sub-culture of production dodges.

The reality is that most of what the BBC does is first rate, and a visit to the United States or Italy will serve to underline British superiority in television. So it is important that Thompson gets the message across: the BBC has to have standards or its public service mission is lost. The example we report today of the flagship Newsnight programme using crude deception to make a point against Alex Salmond, leaves the programme exposed to the question of where else is the deception to be found?

For one of Britain's best current affairs programmes, that is a nightmare for its normally loyal audience.

Newsnight's record would suggest the poll scam was the work of a sloppy researcher. If so, then as Thompson promised, they should be "shown the door".

Television is by its very nature a technology with built-in limitations. Switch on the BBC News at 6 or 10 and you demand to be told what's happening in the world, anywhere, over 25 minutes.

That involves the editing and manipulation of pictures that have come from the ends of the earth.

Charity events and even entertainment should have the same degree of built-in standards. Editing is a process aimed at distilling what has happened.

Deception is a deliberate lie. And on programmes such as Blue Peter, Comic Relief, Newsnight and the doctored tape involving the Queen, deception by the production teams amounts to lies not worthy of the BBC's remit to serve its public.

Thompson's job should be to root out the deceivers, those who have not fully understood the line between the distillation of an idea and a bare faced lie. He should investigate quickly and thoroughly. If that means using less commercially-oriented independent production companies and a return to in-house programming which can enforce standards, then even if the cost is a downturn in ratings, the price will be worth it.