Huw Edwards slams ‘crackers’ people who take issue with the BBC editing audience reactions

Huw Edwards
Avatar

The BBC has caused quite a stir after people caught the outlet editing out audience members laughing at Boris Johnson. Responding to the wave of criticism, presenter Huw Edwards slammed viewers who take issue with such BBC bias on 24 November.

“Crackers”

The fresh scandal concerns footage from the BBC‘s Question Time Leaders Special on 22 November. The BBC covered the debate the following day on the news at 1pm. But viewers noticed that the state broadcaster played a clip of Johnson without the audience laughing at him, which they had done at the event itself. The BBC sought to explain away the edit through “timing reasons”:

Thousands of people criticised both the edit and the broadcaster’s excuse. But when journalist Peter Oborne said the BBC‘s behaviour would be “normal on state TV in Soviet Russia”, Edwards waded in:

‘Sure sign of guilt’

Lots of people took issue with the response from Edwards, who will anchor the BBC‘s election night coverage. Economist David Graeber said that Edwards was misrepresenting his critics:

Many people were quite scathing:

Not how media bias works

Edwards then argued that people were saying the BBC has ‘brainwashed’ him and his colleagues:

But critics again suggested that Edwards is misrepresenting their argument. For them, it’s not that the BBC has brainwashed Edwards. It’s that, if Edwards didn’t uphold their pro-establishment group-think, BBC bosses wouldn’t have appointed him in the first place:

Change, now

Thousands are demanding that BBC director general Tony Hall make a statement on the broadcaster’s behaviour.

It’s surely not ‘crackers’ to believe that editing voter reactions during a general election is a problem. And it’s hard not to agree with suggestions that the BBC needs significant reform.

Featured image via YouTube – TV Newsroom

We need your help ...

The coronavirus pandemic is changing our world, fast. And we will do all we can to keep bringing you news and analysis throughout. But we are worried about maintaining enough income to pay our staff and minimal overheads.

Now, more than ever, we need a vibrant, independent media that holds the government to account and calls it out when it puts vested economic interests above human lives. We need a media that shows solidarity with the people most affected by the crisis – and one that can help to build a world based on collaboration and compassion.

We have been fighting against an establishment that is trying to shut us down. And like most independent media, we don’t have the deep pockets of investors to call on to bail us out.

Can you help by chipping in a few pounds each month?

The Canary Support us