DURING the build up to the coronation, eyes have naturally turned to the BBC, well known and – perhaps at one time – well respected for its wall-to-wall coverage of royal events.
But increasingly in recent years, the public service broadcaster has come under scrutiny for its seemingly biased approach to the monarchy in failing to platform sceptics and those with republican views.
The situation has gotten so bad that last month campaign group Republic wrote to the BBC’s director of editorial and policy standards about a perceived lack of impartiality on the royal family, as polling showed as little as 15% of British people were enthusiastic about the coronation.
So in the build-up to the big day, there has been great intrigue as to how the BBC has approached its coverage. Have anti-monarchy voices been platformed? How well has the corporation painted a picture of how the UK really feels?
READ MORE: King 'to abhor great cry of allegiance' despite helping create idea
The week did not start out well, as Republic pointed out, it had counted 145 stories on the coronation on the BBC News website but not a single one platformed a republican or ambivalent voice. With a lot of trivia and explainers, it seemed as if the BBC was trying desperately to bring people on board and make them knowledgeable about the occasion when many simply couldn’t care less.
As the week went on, anti-monarchy voices did start to appear in pockets. Journalist and republican Ash Sarkar made an appearance on Newsnight and said the royal family were a “cartel of some very weird people”.
On BBC Breakfast, the likes of Keir Starmer and Ed Davey were asked about whether the coronation was appropriate during the cost of living crisis.
‘Whatever way you slice it, the monarchy is neither a fair nor representative institution’
— BBC Newsnight (@BBCNewsnight) May 2, 2023
Journalist Ash Sarkar says she believes the royal family have revealed themselves to be a ‘cartel of some very weird people’https://t.co/P0zxS1DNGF pic.twitter.com/3onmEh5lMf
There were also stories giving a voice to those who have to work during the coronation, and one interviewing a handful of people who would not be watching the ceremony, some of whom said they didn’t agree with the monarchy and felt it is a waste of public money.
At this point you may begin to think the BBC has turned a corner, even more so when an article appeared on the website on Wednesday entitled “five tips on how to avoid the coronation of King Charles III”.
But staunch republicans were probably pretty disappointed when they read that story, as there was no mention of any protests. Alternative coronation parties where people can express their displeasure, yes, but not active demonstrations.
It’s almost as if the BBC settled for platforming anti-monarchy views, but when it came to highlighting ways in which you could express those feelings in a meaningful way, or really pushing on those big questions of whether the royal family is relevant anymore, whether it works for people, whether it’s time to move on, it may still have fallen short.
The question in everyone’s minds is, were those voices given brief spotlight simply as a token gesture? Was it just to tick a box so that it could say it had been balanced?
Poll after poll has suggested, particularly in Scotland, most people are losing their patience with the monarchy and time will tell if the BBC comes to understand it cannot perform a public service and fawn over the monarchy at the same time.
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules here