The BBC has made a damning admission about its DWP coverage

BBC News logo and the DWP logo
Support us and go ad-free

A BBC News editor has made some staggering comments about the channel’s news coverage; not least in relation to the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) flagship benefit, Universal Credit. Because he thinks people are “sick” of “grim” news.

The DWP versus the royals?

BBC Newswatch is the broadcaster’s 15-minute programme where viewers send in their comments about news coverage. The BBC then attempts to critique its own coverage.

No, really. It does. ‘Attempt’ to, that is.

The edition broadcast on Friday 19 October focused on the BBC‘s coverage of the royal family. Specifically, both the pregnancy of the Duchess of Sussex and the wedding of Princess Eugenie and Jack Brooksbank.

Viewer’s comments were a mixed bag. One person, in particular, criticised the BBC for making the ‘royal baby’ headline news. They called the broadcaster “sycophantic”. Surely not…?

Criticism from a BBC viewer

More comments from a viewer

Read on...

Support us and go ad-free

The viewers final comment

Even host Samira Ahmed seemed taken aback. Viewers? Complaining about royal news? What has the UK come to? She noted that:

there were complaints about what some viewers saw as excessive coverage of that happy news.

Ahmed didn’t say who the royal baby was “happy news” for. But she didn’t need to. As it certainly wasn’t for the four million children living in poverty in the UK.

But the most revealing part was Ahmed’s interview with the deputy editor of BBC News Toby Castle. Because his comments showed just why the BBC‘s is often so dire.

A popularity contest?

He started by defending the BBC‘s royal baby news. He argued it was the most “widely read” story on the BBC website. So does that mean the BBC bases its headline news on what people are already reading?

He then said:

If you look at the other stories that were… competing for the top of that bulletin at one o’clock, y’know – our audience is quite different at one o’clock to say six and ten o’clock…

So Castle essentially said the BBC tailors its news coverage to suit who’s watching it. But surely, the BBC is an impartial broadcaster. It’s not its job to appeal to one group in society. It should base its news on what is the most serious. No?

People are “sick” of “grim” news

Obviously not. Because Castle then went on to admit that Meghan and Harry:

are a hugely popular story for us online and on other outlets.

And he then went even further to defend the BBC against claims of ‘sycophancy’, saying:

People are absolutely sick of the diet of grim news.

Sorry, what?

So because the news is so awful at present, the BBC won’t broadcast it in case people start switching off? It’s not the job of a public service broadcaster to filter out bad news. Its job is to report on whatever the news is – good or bad.

Just bury the bad news and be done with it

Ahmed then put it to Castle that:

With Brexit, with serious concerns about Universal Credit… viewers need and want analysis of these stories. Does the BBC need to rethink how much time you can devote to the royal family now.

He said:

I think we simply can’t win here.

Can’t win? Surely a story about a DWP benefit that will hit seven million people would trump news about a baby that only directly impacts the royal family? Or Brexit, which affects every person in the UK?

Clearly, in Castle’s world, the DWP versus the royals is a tricky one. And the BBC wonders why it gets called ‘sycophantic’. It’s almost as if it has an agenda…

Watch the full interview:

Get Involved!

Read more from The Canary on the DWP.

Featured image via EEIM – Wikimedia and UK government – Wikimedia 

Support us and go ad-free

We need your help to keep speaking the truth

Every story that you have come to us with; each injustice you have asked us to investigate; every campaign we have fought; each of your unheard voices we amplified; we do this for you. We are making a difference on your behalf.

Our fight is your fight. You’ve supported our collective struggle every time you gave us a like; and every time you shared our work across social media. Now we need you to support us with a monthly donation.

We have published nearly 2,000 articles and over 50 films in 2021. And we want to do this and more in 2022 but we don’t have enough money to go on at this pace. So, if you value our work and want us to continue then please join us and be part of The Canary family.

In return, you get:

* Advert free reading experience
* Quarterly group video call with the Editor-in-Chief
* Behind the scenes monthly e-newsletter
* 20% discount in our shop

Almost all of our spending goes to the people who make The Canary’s content. So your contribution directly supports our writers and enables us to continue to do what we do: speaking truth, powered by you. We have weathered many attempts to shut us down and silence our vital opposition to an increasingly fascist government and right-wing mainstream media.

With your help we can continue:

* Holding political and state power to account
* Advocating for the people the system marginalises
* Being a media outlet that upholds the highest standards
* Campaigning on the issues others won’t
* Putting your lives central to everything we do

We are a drop of truth in an ocean of deceit. But we can’t do this without your support. So please, can you help us continue the fight?

The Canary Support us

Comments are closed