THE BBC received hundreds of complaints after a news reporter described a far-right march as “pro-British,” a newly published report has revealed.
The broadcaster sparked anger with a news piece on August 4 where a journalist, speaking from Bolton, reported on a march promoted as “Enough is Enough: Stand up for Country” and a counter-protest.
Clashes saw missiles thrown between the two groups and bricks launched at riot police, according to reports from the scene. Police later released CCTV images (shown below) of people they said they would like to talk to in connection with the disturbances.
A BBC reporter, speaking from near Bolton town hall where the skirmishes were taking place, said: “For around half an hour it was quite peaceful, there was a small camp of protests, the pro-British march on one side of the town hall here, and the counter-protest on the other side of the town hall.”
BBC reporter has just described rioters as "a pro-British march" pic.twitter.com/IR8695kGWF
— Ted Booth (@tedgbooth) August 4, 2024
The framing of the anti-immigration march as “pro-British” sparked anger on social media at the time, with one person writing: “This violence doesn’t represent Welsh or Scottish people, anyone English with any kind of mixed heritage, or indeed most civilised white people. This isn’t Britain or Britishness.”
And another added: “Calling a race riot a ‘pro-British march’ so casually, so unthinkingly, is incredibly telling. This isn’t impartiality.”
Now, a fortnightly report from the BBC has revealed that 404 people lodged a complaint about the broadcast.
The report also showed that 361 people had complained about an “insensitive” interview with a child in the wake of the Southport stabbings which claimed three lives. The interview was shown on BBC News twice, at 6pm and again at 10pm on August 1.
READ MORE: BBC Question Time ‘overuses’ guests from right-wing media, research finds
Previously, the BBC responded to complaints about the "pro-British" comment, noting people had found it "offensive".
The broadcaster said: "Both during our bulletin at 10PM and the early evening news, our reporter clearly attributed the term 'pro-British march' making it plain this is how the protest in Bolton had been advertised by the organisers. We acknowledge there was one instance in live BBC News coverage where this attribution was not included, but our reporter had already made it clear – just moments before – that this was the description of the organisers of the march. This important context has been omitted from some selective edits on social media.
"We made clear the actions of the protesters in Bolton, the nature of the clashes between the protesters and counter-demonstrators, and the police response in handling this volatile situation. We also heard the views of the counter-demonstrators.
"Throughout our coverage of the disorder taking place in towns and cities across the country we have detailed the violence and nature of unrest which has taken place in different areas and the impact on the police and local communities affected. We have reflected statements made by the Prime Minister and others across the political spectrum."
Elsewhere, the BBC report published on Friday revealed that the broadcaster’s executive complaints unit had dismissed three separate complaints about BBC Scotland’s output.
One viewer had questioned why a Reform election candidate saying that Nicola Sturgeon “should be shot” had not featured in a Reporting Scotland broadcast, another claimed First Minister John Swinney had been consistently interrupted during a radio interview, and a third alleged that too much weight had been given to views opposing a block on arms sales to Israel on a broadcast of Seven Days.
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 hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel