The BBC has been bombarded with more than 1,000 bias complaints over its Question Time immigration special which featured two former asylum seekers planted in the audience.
In a response issued today, the broadcaster defended its decision to feature the refugees in the episode, which aired on December 4, as “fair and right”.
On the panel on the long-running debate programme was Reform UK’s head of policy, Zia Yusuf, who said the asylum seekers had arrived in Britain “illegally by boat”.
Mr Yusuf told GB News it was “bewildering”, adding: “In the car home, I genuinely had to sit there and just try to reassure myself that this did actually happen. I felt like I was on The Truman Show or something.”
A fortnightly report issued by the BBC has now revealed the show received 1,379 complaints accusing it of bias in favour of immigration and against Mr Yusuf.
Responding to the complaints, the BBC said the two audience members had since been granted refugee status and are now living in Britain legally.
Its statement read: “The Question Time debate about immigration was a chance to explore, in detail, an issue that has had such an impact on UK politics in recent times.
“As well as numerous contributions from the panel, we heard from 20 members of the audience expressing views from all sides of the immigration debate.
Reform’s Zia Yusuf wrote a letter of complaint to the broadcaster the day after the Question Time episode aired
|
BBC
“Within the format of Question Time, audience members often share personal details to offer context and lived experience linked to the topic in discussion.
“Two people featured on the programme were former asylum seekers who have been granted refugee status by the Government and so now have a legal basis for being in the UK.
“We believe it was fair and right to feature these individuals.
“Their involvement meant that when a member of the audience asked why many immigrants arrive without their families, we were able to put that question directly to one of the former asylum seekers.
One of the migrants in the BBC QT audience
|
BBC QUESTION TIME“To be clear, the programme featured individuals who are now legally in this country. They were not paid to participate.
“Each political party on the panel was informed of the participation of the former asylum seekers on Wednesday, the day before the show was filmed.
“It has been suggested that a member of the audience was given a script and / or was wearing an earpiece and being fed questions to ask the panel by the production team – this is not true. Audience members aren’t briefed what to say and ask their own questions.
“For special programmes such as this edition, the production team work hard to ensure that the audience has a range of experiences, views and backgrounds linked to the topic.
“We are therefore confident that the audience for this programme was not weighted towards a certain political stance.
“We recognise that immigration is a subject which many people feel very strongly about.
“We remain committed to covering this topic accurately and impartially. We have recorded your feedback in the complaints report and shared this with senior management.”
The number of complaints lodged against the BBC for the Question Time special is around five times more than those made against other programmes during the same 14-day period between December 1 and December 14.
The Question Time episode was based in Dover and exclusively focused on the topic of migration
|
BBC
The second-highest number of complaints in the same fortnight was 232 against an episode of Saturday Kitchen, which aired on December 6.
Rebecca Ryan, Campaign Director at Defund the BBC, said: “The BBC has now quietly admitted that its Question Time special on December 4 triggered 1,379 complaints — over five times more than other programmes of that sort.
“That is not a minor lapse. It is a public rejection of a programme that viewers believe was biased, stage-managed and agenda-driven.
“This is exactly why the BBC cannot be trusted with compulsory funding. When people are forced to pay for a broadcaster, accountability collapses — and programmes like this are the result.”
“If the BBC wants to campaign, provoke and editorialise, it should also stand on its own feet financially. Scrap the licence fee. Let the public choose whether the BBC deserves their money.”
Reform UK said the Question Time episode represented a “serious failure of impartiality” by the BBC.
A party spokesman said: “It is little wonder that there were so many complaints about the Question Time: Immigration Special, given it clearly represented a serious failure of impartiality, editorial judgement and audience selection by the BBC.
“The question still remains as to why the BBC thought it was a good idea to platform men who had entered the United Kingdom illegally, giving them a national stage to lecture the British public on immigration policy.”
The BBC is currently facing a lawsuit of up $10billion (£7.5 billion) filed by Donald Trump over the editing of a speech he made before the 2021 attack on the Capitol.
The US President’s lawyers argue the depiction of him given in the edit, which aired in a Panorama documentary a week before the results of the 2024 US election, “was false and defamatory” and said “the BBC intentionally and maliciously sought to fully mislead its viewers around the world”.
In the programme, a clip from Mr Trump’s speech on January 6, 2021, was spliced to show him saying: “We’re going to walk down to the Capitol… and I’ll be there with you. And we fight. We fight like hell.”
A BBC spokesman said: “As we have made clear previously, we will be defending this case. We are not going to make further comment on ongoing legal proceedings.”
Donald Trump has filed a lawsuit against the BBC and is seeking up to $10 billion in damages
|
PA
The Panorama programme was not broadcast in the US, but the lawsuit says it can be watched on the BritBox subscription streaming platform and also claims “millions of Florida citizens use a virtual private network (VPN) to view content such as the Panorama documentary”.
The scandal unfolded earlier this year after a leaked memo, written by Michael Prescott, a former external adviser to the BBC’s editorial standards committee, highlighted concerns about the Panorama episode.
After the report was leaked, BBC chairman Samir Shah apologised on behalf of the BBC over an “error of judgment” and accepted the editing of the 2024 documentary gave “the impression of a direct call for violent action”.
The fallout from the report also led to the resignation of both director-general Tim Davie and head of BBC News Deborah Turness.
