COULD NIGEL FARAGE BE AN ‘IMPARTIAL’ BROADCASTER ON GB NEWS DURING THE GENERAL ELECTION CAMPAIGN?

Nigel Farage, not normally a man for self-doubt, has admitted it ‘could be tricky’ choosing between party politics and broadcasting during a General Election campaign. Interviewed for  Politico’s ‘Westminster Insider’ podcast ‘Inside GB News’ about his future as the Honorary President of the Reform UK Party he replied:

‘if I want to cover a General Election for GB News under a period of purdah, it could be tricky couldn’t it, could be very difficult and I think ..but I don’t know, I’m thinking very hard about it. But I think it is an either/or choice’

So if Farage stood down from Reform UK and focused on covering the General Election for GB News would he run into trouble with Ofcom rules on GB News which now calls itself ‘Britain’s Election Channel?

To look ahead at what might be possible I first monitored his current output for a fortnight . Farage regularly echoed Reform UK’s attacks on Rishi Sunak’s ‘Brexit failures’ asking viewers ‘why do we believe a word they say’. For the past two nights Farage has quoted from what he calls his ‘Rwanda Files’, apparently leaked documents from the Home Office.  He says that Sunak ‘wilfully deceived the nation’ over ‘Stop the Boats’ when he said in March last year that under the Illegal Immigration Bill  immigrants on boats would be removed from the UK ‘within weeks’. Farage says the Home Office knew that couldn’t happen. After his first attack there was no coverage on his programme of any response from the Prime Minister or the Home Office, the second night saw a one paragraph quote from the Home Office.

The most common ‘Farage’ format is best described as the  “I agree with Nigel’ nights: 

  1. Opening monologue;  a familiar narrative of illegal immigrants and the crimes some have committed, the shortcomings of the Government’s Rwanda Bill and Britain’s ‘exploding population’.
  2. An interview with a GB News correspondent who plays a relatively straight bat on an issue of the day. 
  3. Interviews with experts: these are not the ‘fruitcakes and loonies and closet racists’ who David Cameron once said comprised Farage’s UKIP party. They are Daily Telegraph correspondents, former army officers and chaplains to Queen Elizabeth. What they have in common is that they agree with Nigel. Sometimes they tell him that and sometimes he tells them.
  4. Captions summarising the reaction of viewers so far, normally three people who agree with Nigel.   
  5. A second monologue, titled ‘WTF’, in which Farage attacks his usual suspects such as the EU, Prince Harry and ‘senile’ Joe Biden. 

The irony about this format is that the rare occasions when a guest completely disagrees with Farage produces the best television. Labour supporter Scarlett MccGwire refuted his claim that the anger of Muslim voters over Gaza could be the start of ‘sectarian politics’ in Britain and damage Labour. She replied that ‘you are much more dangerous’ for the Conservatives because ‘you are going to make sure they lose the election’.   

During my monitoring  there were fewer interviews with MPs than I expected. Over the period I counted six Conservative MPs being interviewed by Farage, all were Brexiteers, but there were no Labour or Liberal Democrat MPs.  

That kind of imbalance wouldn’t previously have been countenanced by broadcasters or allowed by regulators but the current Ofcom regime have emphasised the freedom which they are currently giving to broadcasters to provide impartiality in their own way.

In the podcast interview Farage emphasised the editorial freedom which he’s been given by GB News. So what could a Farage election campaign programme look like ? 

1. Ofcom say that during election campaigns ‘It is not acceptable for presenters to use their position to encourage and urge voters to support political parties or candidates’. Farage is smart enough to avoid the call to action which got Talk Sport presenter James Whale into trouble with Ofcom during the Mayor of London election in 2008:

‘if people did not vote for Boris Johnson then they had only themselves to blame if “Livingstone gets in for another term”.

2. Ofcom also say ‘Due weight must be given to the coverage of parties and independent candidates during the election period’. GB News could solve this by extending the news bulletin that precedes Farage’s show to include more campaign coverage clips.

3.Since Ofcom seem to have no problem with the ‘I agree with Nigel format’ expect more ‘experts’ who tell Nigel, as one did during my monitoring period, ‘you’re quite right’.

4. The biggest change to the Farage status quo would have to be the selection of guests from political parties: 6-0 to the Tories won’t wash in an election. And Reform will certainly expect a say.

So there’s a possible template, now Farage has to make his ‘either Reform or GB News’ decision: either campaign for Reform and lose friends in the Tory Party by costing them votes or stay on air on GB News building an even bigger profile and preparing for a future Tory leadership election. 

SECOND THOUGHTS 22/12/2023

THE BBC’S ‘BASHIRGATE’ COUNTDOWN CLOCK IS TICKING.

At the BBC the countdown is underway to a crucial moment in so-called ‘Bashirgate’, one that goes to the heart of how the current BBC Executive have managed recent developments in the affair. The tribunal which hears contested Freedom of Information cases has set a deadline, believed to be January 24th, for the BBC to release documents to journalist Andy Webb.  Last month the tribunal strongly criticised the BBC  for failing to release a large number of emails relating to Martin Bashir’s 1995 interview with Princess Diana on Panorama. It said the corporation had been “inconsistent, erroneous and unreliable”. Andy Webb wants the release of over 3,000 internal BBC emails sent between September and November 2020 . This period includes the dates between Lord Spencer first asking the BBC for an independent inquiry into the events of 1995, the BBC’s initial reluctance and their eventual decision to agree to what became Lord Dyson’s inquiry.

The BBC can only withhold certain documents if it can convince the tribunal in the remaining days that it has the legal right to do so. A release of key documents would make it possible to compare this internal evidence with the public account given by the Director-General Tim Davie in an interview on the Today programme. A transcript is in my timeline of the Bashir affair.

Last weekend it became clear the BBC is facing further potential jeopardy, that it may have committed a criminal breach of the Freedom of Information Act. A spokesperson for the Information Commissioner’s Office said that following a complaint by Mr Webb under section 77 of the Freedom of Information Act the “case has been referred to the criminal investigations team who are currently reviewing the material provided”. Section 77 says ‘any person to whom this subsection applies is guilty of an offence if he alters, defaces, blocks, erases, destroys or conceals any record held by the public authority’.

This review would be a first step before any more detailed inquiry by the criminal investigations team. Investigation is a most unusual step, there has only been one previous conviction for the offence which carries an unlimited fine.

CAN BROADCASTERS CAMPAIGN?

As a regular critic of Ofcom for what I believe is its failure to enforce the impartiality rules on GB News,  I now believe it has gone too far the other way.

Let me explain. Cast your mind back to the General Election election campaign of 2017, that’s the one where ‘strong and stable leader’ Theresa May wasn’t as popular as PM as she thought. Throughout the election campaign she had refused to take part in a head-to-head TV debate with Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn. In the next year, 2018, Sky News launched what it called its ‘Make Debates Happen campaign’. The Head of Sky News was interviewed about it on the air and Sky News started a petition ‘for an independent commission to monitor regular leaders’ debates and make them a permanent election feature.’ Jeremy Corbyn supported it,Theresa May didn’t. I was struck at the time by how unusual it was for a broadcaster to run a public campaign which divided on party lines. Ofcom took no action.

Now Ofcom has decided against GB News after a programme which promoted a ‘GB News- branded campaign called ‘Don’t Kill Cash’. This campaign included a petition which called on the Government to “introduce legislation to protect the status of cash as legal tender’.  GB News had argued that the campaign was ‘not about a matter of political controversy or current public policy’.

The decision will leave all broadcasters, not just GB News wondering whether they stand on ‘campaigns’. At ITN I always tried to avoid the word, my advice was ‘call it an investigation’.

‘DORRIES TELLING TRUTH’ SHOCK.

There appears to be growing momentum behind Alan Rusbridger’s admirable campaign to get a proper response from the BBC to allegations that a board member, Robbie Gibb , tried to interfere in the process leading to the appointment of the Chair of Ofcom, which is of course the BBC’s regulator. The issue was raised by MPs during the hearing to confirm the new BBC Chair but Samir Shah didn’t want to comment on it. This month there was also evidence from a source ‘who worked closely with’ Nadine Dorries when she was DCMS Secretary. It was Ms Dorries who first made the allegation against Gibb in her her book ‘The Plot’. The book has been widely criticised for being less than factual  but this particular allegation has never been denied by anybody. Jake Kanter, a widely respected media correspondent now working for the American website Deadline, reports that the source tells him that Gibb “campaigned” for his preferred candidate to become Ofcom chair

.

Lucy Manning interview with Peter Fincham – 15 Nov 2012

Lucy Manning interview with Peter Fincham – 15 Nov 2012

LM: What’s your reaction to Ofcom deciding to investigate ITV? It’s very embarrassing isn’t it?

PF: The way that This Morning interviewed PM last Thursday… was misguided and on that day PS issued a statement apologising. We did the same. We launched an investigation straight away which has concluded today, less than a week from the interview… we’ve taken disciplinary action.

LM: You say disciplinary action but PS is still on air today so what sort of disciplinary action.

PF: I can’t discuss in detail what disciplinary action we’ve taken against those involved in the production.  I’ve spoken to PS myself, he realises his mistake, he apologised extremely fully and extremely quickly… he is under no illusions that this is a lapse in ITV journalism.

LM: This is terribly embarrassing for ITV, how could this have happened, MPs are wanting to know?

PF: In live TV all sorts of things can happen, that doesn’t mean they should happen… I’m confident this sort of thing won’t happen again.

LM: No tougher punishments? No suspensions or anything like that?

PF: I can’t discuss the details of the disciplinary action… We think it’s appropriate and have taken this extremely seriously.

LM: Letter from Lord McAlpine

PF: We’ve had a letter from Lord McAlpine today and I will respond to that very quickly. I’ve also had a letter from John Whittingdale and I will respond to that quickly as well.  As you say Ofcom have launched an investigation and we will cooperate fully in that investigation.

LM: And you’re happy that all the steps that should have been taken for that programme were taken? Where was the editor? Where was the production staff? Why was Philip Schofield thrusting this list at the PM?

PF: I’m not happy that this happened. We have editorial processes and checks in place and to be honest with you they weren’t followed so I’m not happy about that but I think that the way we’ve tackled this and responded has been quick and decisive and I’m happy we won’t see something like this again on This Morning or any other ITV programmes.

LM: And PS stays on air?

PF: PS stays on air, yes.

Download Lucy Manning’s interview with Peter Fincham in a Microsoft Word file here