Prescott says Panorama edit ‘probably’ does not damage Trump<\/p>\n
Prescott has been pressed again by Liberal Democrat MP Cameron Thomas to answer whether he agrees with Trump\u2019s argument that the 12-second video edit of his January 6 speech damages his reputation.<\/p>\n
Thomas: \u201cDo you agree that Donald Trump\u2019s reputation has been tarnished by this documentary?\u201d<\/p>\n
Prescott: \u201cProbably not\u201d.<\/p>\n
He offers a rueful smile.<\/p>\n
Share<\/a><\/p>\n Updated at\u00a011.58 EST<\/p>\n Key events<\/p>\n Show key events only<\/p>\n Please turn on JavaScript to use this feature<\/p>\n Caroline Daniel says from her experience on the standards committee there was always active discussion on editorial bias.<\/p>\n \u201cIt\u2019s put the spotlight on issues of impartiality, which in my view, the BBC<\/a> was actively engaging with on a regular basis.<\/p>\n \u201cThe fact that the committee was extremely robust, discussions were had, research was commissioned on a regular basis, and it was challenging research, I think that\u2019s a really healthy organisation and a very healthy debate.\u201d<\/p>\n Share<\/a>Prescott memo did not reflect full report on BBC’s US election coverage – other adviser<\/p>\n Caroline Daniel says she thinks her fellow former adviser\u2019s memo \u201cdoes not provide a comprehensive view of what was in the David Grossman report.\u201d<\/p>\n She is sitting right next to Prescott while giving her assessment of what she says was \u201ca personal account rather than a comprehensive review of everything that was covered in the (standards) committee.\u201d<\/p>\n MP: \u201cWhat do you think was missing?\u201d<\/p>\n Daniel: \u201cI think the David Grossman report covered a lot of ground, significant errors, like the coverage of the election and the use of polling, issues like who is being represented on programs, issues of impartiality.<\/p>\n There was obviously a BBC<\/a> response to it as well, which was also significant. They did engage with each of the details of the David Grossman report.<\/p>\n Share<\/a>Panorama inaccuracy does not undercut broader BBC principles of accuracy, Daniel says<\/p>\n Caroline Daniel, the other external adviser to the standards committee alongside Prescott has also stepped into defend the Panorama edit.<\/p>\n \u201cObviously, issues of trust are foundational to the BBC<\/a>. It is very important that they take inaccuracies extremely seriously,\u201d she says.<\/p>\n She adds that it was \u201cregrettable that this wasn\u2019t recognised at the time\u201d and that probably by the time Panorama was alerted to it, it was too late for the BBC to take practical action \u2013 more than a year after the episode had been broadcast.<\/p>\n She also stresses that David Grossman\u2019s 20-page report on the US election \u201cwas really about a much broader, comprehensive view about US election coverage.\u201d<\/p>\n \u201cIt wasn\u2019t to try and micromanage a particular programme, edit an individual issue out of principle\u2026 I personally think that the BBC did take issues of impartiality and accuracy incredibly seriously. It\u2019s the reason that the one of the most trusted news brands in the world.\u201d<\/p>\n Share<\/a>Prescott says Panorama edit ‘probably’ does not damage Trump<\/p>\n Prescott has been pressed again by Liberal Democrat MP Cameron Thomas to answer whether he agrees with Trump\u2019s argument that the 12-second video edit of his January 6 speech damages his reputation.<\/p>\n Thomas: \u201cDo you agree that Donald Trump\u2019s reputation has been tarnished by this documentary?\u201d<\/p>\n Prescott: \u201cProbably not\u201d.<\/p>\n He offers a rueful smile.<\/p>\n Share<\/a><\/p>\n Updated at\u00a011.58 EST<\/p>\n Committee questions Prescott on his own bias in leaked memo<\/p>\n MP Rupa Huq questions Prescott on his own political bias in his memo, noting that many of his concerns appear to come from a certain slant.<\/p>\n She points out some of the language he used are common phrases used in right-wing ideological circles, or that experts he references are \u201cnot completely neutral people\u201d.<\/p>\n Prescott says that he didn\u2019t have a \u201ctick list\u201d, and his memo just reflected reports \u201ccommissioned by the entire (standards) committee\u201d for editorial adviser David Grossman to look into.<\/p>\n \u201cWe never knew what he would come back with. And if you take American presidential race, for example, it did come back saying, well, actually, it\u2019s a little unbalanced.\u201d<\/p>\n Huq says she watched the whole 70-minute Panorama documentary last night, and the 12-second edit does not change what the topic was about, which she says Trump would probably like because it includes many MAGA supporters.<\/p>\n Share<\/a><\/p>\n Updated at\u00a011.36 EST<\/p>\n Prescott is asked if he agrees with Trump that the BBC<\/a> documentary constitutes defamation, given the US president has been indicted over the January 6 riots.<\/p>\n \u201cI can\u2019t think of anything I agree with Donald Trump<\/a> on,\u201d Prescott replies.<\/p>\n Share<\/a>Watch the questioning live<\/p>\n Just a reminder to readers, the live feed from the House of Commons session can be viewed right here in the stream embedded at the top of this blog.<\/p>\n Share<\/a>Glastonbury apology a sign of improvement- Daniel<\/p>\n Daniel however, the other external adviser, says there have been improvements including after systemic reviews on certain subject matters.<\/p>\n She gives the example of Tim Davie\u2019s immediate response after the BBC\u2019s live broadcast of Bob Vylan\u2019s set at Glastonbury Festival where the singer chanted \u201cDeath to the IDF\u201d.<\/p>\n I think that was a speedy apology, and rightly so. I think there are probably many other examples where the BBC has apologised, in the last few years.<\/p>\n But I would say I think the real issue is the culture of the BBC in terms of the level of attention paid to these issues. And again, in my view, the fact that we had a robust committee to debate issues of impartiality, the fact that we had David Grossman being commissioned to ask questions about the BBC\u2019s coverage in order to help inform future coverage, was actually really significant.<\/p>\n I think there are a few organisations when you actually have that level of auditing internally on a regular basis, and this is an ongoing issue. This is not one and done.<\/p>\n Share<\/a><\/p>\n Updated at\u00a011.12 EST<\/p>\n Editorial mistakes weren’t being thoroughly addressed- Prescott<\/p>\n Much of the criticism from Prescott is around what he says is BBC<\/a> News departments failing to throughly address editorial mistakes when pointed out by the panel.<\/p>\n What I was frequently seeing was that the BBC\u2019s idea of dealing with something was to change the editors around, tweak the written guidelines, but there was never, it seemed to me, any willingness at exactly what went wrong and whether there were deep implications.\u201d<\/p>\n He has described some of the responses as \u201cdefensive\u201d and he says there\u2019s a problem of some \u201ccultural forces\u201d within the BBC, without specifying what exactly.<\/p>\n When questioned further by the committee, he mentions: \u201cYou\u2019ve got urban rural bias, possibly a London focus, London values versus values outside of the capital\u201d.<\/p>\n Share<\/a><\/p>\n Updated at\u00a011.23 EST<\/p>\n ‘No idea’ how memo was leaked – Prescott<\/p>\n Prescott is questioned on how his memo of editorial concerns was leaked to the Telegraph report.<\/p>\n \u201cI have no idea\u201d, he says.<\/p>\n His dossier pointed out failings in the editing of a Trump speech, allegations of bias in its coverage of the Israel-Hamas war and trans issues.<\/p>\n He\u2019d said that he had also sent the memo off to the Ofcom regulator after sending it to the BBC<\/a> board to highlight what he thought were editorial concerns.<\/p>\n He says the memo was \u201call my own work\u201d and that he\u2019d not written it with anyone else.<\/p>\n Share<\/a><\/p>\n Updated at\u00a011.21 EST<\/p>\n ‘I\u2019m a centrist dad’ – Prescott<\/p>\n Prescott is questioned on his own personal biases and refers to reports about Robbie Gibb\u2019s Conservative background.<\/p>\n The Committee chair has been asking if one personality was more dominant than the other members on the standards committee. It has been alleged that Gibb\u2019s political views steered the panel one direction.<\/p>\n \u201cYou\u2019re asking about my preferences. I am no ideological soul mate of Robbie Gibbs. I\u2019m a centrist dad.\u201d<\/p>\n He is asked whether the fact his company received more than \u00a3100,000 in donations from a conservative Republican donor influenced him. He says he did want the BBC<\/a> to be completely impartial.<\/p>\n