View source for BBC controversies

{{Short description|none}} <!-- "none" is preferred when the title is sufficiently descriptive; see [[WP:SDNONE]] -->
{{About|controversies around the [[BBC]] in general|criticisms of the BBC|Criticism of the BBC|(infringement of) its independence specifically|BBC independence}}
{{Use dmy dates|date=May 2024}}
{{Use British English|date=April 2014}}
{{Multiple issues|
{{Overly detailed|date=July 2023}}
{{recentism|date=July 2023}}
{{Lead too short|date=July 2023}}
{{Copy edit|date=November 2025}}
}}{{Merge from|Thailand: The Dark Side of Paradise|discuss=Talk:BBC controversies#November_2025|date=November 2025}}
This article outlines, in chronological order, the various controversies surrounding or involving the [[BBC]].

==Early years==
===1926 general strike===
{{primary sources|section|date=March 2021}}
In 1926, the [[General Council of the Trades Union Congress]] (TUC) called a [[1926 United Kingdom general strike|General Strike]] to prevent wage reductions and worsening conditions for 1.2 million locked-out coal miners. [[Labour Party (UK)|Labour Party]] politicians such as party leader [[Ramsay MacDonald]] and [[Philip Snowden]] criticised the BBC for being "biased" and "misleading the public" during the strike.<ref name="bbc.co.uk">{{cite web |title=The General Strike |url=http://www.bbc.co.uk/historyofthebbc/resources/bbcandgov/pdf/generalstrike.pdf |publisher=BBC |access-date=26 March 2021 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120220030515/http://www.bbc.co.uk/historyofthebbc/resources/bbcandgov/pdf/generalstrike.pdf |archive-date=20 February 2012}}</ref>

Prime Minister [[Stanley Baldwin]] was coached by [[John Reith, 1st Baron Reith|John Reith]] during a national broadcast about the strike which he made from Reith's house. When Ramsay MacDonald asked to make a broadcast in reply, Reith supported the request. However, Baldwin was "quite against MacDonald broadcasting" and Reith refused the request.<ref name="guardian180814">{{cite web |last1=Higgins |first1=Charlotte |title=BBC's long struggle to present the facts without fear or favour |url=https://www.theguardian.com/media/2014/aug/18/-sp-bbc-report-facts-impartial |website=The Guardian |access-date=19 May 2020 |date=18 August 2014}}</ref>

Baldwin's government blocked the BBC from broadcasting statements about the strike by the Labour Party and TUC leaders. When [[Philip Snowden]], the former Labour [[Chancellor of the Exchequer]], wrote to the ''[[Radio Times]]'' to complain about the BBC's treatment of the unions, Reith wrote that the BBC was not totally independent from the government, which had imposed some constraints on what the BBC could do.<ref name="bbc.co.uk"/> [[Randall Davidson]], Archbishop of Canterbury, wished to broadcast a "peace appeal" to call for an immediate end to the strike, renewal of government subsidies to the coal industry and no cuts in miners' wages. Reith denied his request because he believed such a speech would be used by [[Winston Churchill]] to take over the BBC. Churchill wanted to use the BBC as a government tool during the strike.<ref name="bbc.co.uk"/> Reith wrote in his diary that the government "know they can trust us not to be really impartial".<ref>{{cite web |last1=Sinclair |first1=Ian |title=Uncovering the ignorance of the BBC's big beasts |url=https://morningstaronline.co.uk/article/f/uncovering-ignorance-bbcs-big-beasts |website=Morning Star |access-date=26 March 2021|date=23 March 2021}}</ref>

A post-strike analysis carried out by the BBC's Programme Correspondence Department reported that of those polled, 3,696 commended the BBC's coverage, whilst 176 were critical.<ref name="bbc.co.uk"/>

===Between the wars===
Since 1927, there have been arguments over impartiality at the BBC. In 1927, under a Royal Charter, the BBC became a public entity for the first time – with requirements including the need for impartiality and for staff not to express opinions on controversial subject matters.{{citation needed|date=March 2021}}

Prior to World War II, [[Sir John Reith]] excluded Winston Churchill from the BBC airwaves.<ref name="Robinson">Nick Robinson, '[https://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/tvandradio/bbc/9606384/Nick-Robinson-Winston-Churchills-bitter-battle-with-the-BBC.html Winston Churchill's bitter battle with the BBC]', ''The Daily Telegraph'' (14 October 2012). Retrieved 24 February 2018.</ref> At the time of the [[Munich Agreement]] of 1938, Churchill "complained that he had been very badly treated...and that he was always muzzled by the BBC".<ref name="Robinson" />

===1930s to Cold War: MI5 vetting===
{{main|"Christmas tree" files}}
From the late 1930s until the end of the [[Cold War]], [[MI5]] had an officer at the BBC vetting editorial applicants. During World War II 'subversives', particularly suspected [[Communist Party of Great Britain|communists]] such as the folk singer [[Ewan MacColl]], were banned from the BBC. The personnel records of anyone suspicious were stamped with a distinctively shaped green tag, or "Christmas tree;" only a handful of BBC personnel staff knew what the 'Christmas trees' meant.<ref>{{cite news | last = Smith| first = David | title = BBC banned communists in purge |work=The Observer | date = 5 March 2006| url = https://www.theguardian.com/media/2006/mar/05/broadcasting.bbc | access-date =28 December 2008| location=London}}</ref>

===1930s: Commercial radio controversy===
Because the BBC had become both a monopoly and a non-commercial entity, it soon faced controversial competition from British subjects who were operating leased transmitters on the continent of Europe before World War II, to broadcast commercial radio programmes into the United Kingdom. [[John Reith, 1st Baron Reith|John Reith]], who had been given powers to dictate the cultural output of the BBC, retaliated by leading the opposition to these commercial stations. Controversy spilled over into the press when the British government attempted to censor the printing of their programme information. The pressure was created by the success of these stations.{{Citation needed|date=October 2008}}

===1930s onwards: Broadcasting jazz===
In her biography of her father, ''My Father: Reith of the BBC'', [[John Reith, 1st Baron Reith|John Reith]]'s daughter [[Marista Leishman]] said that he banned the playing of [[jazz music]] on the BBC and that he wrote in his diary that "[[Negermusik|Germany has banned hot jazz]] and I'm sorry that we should be behind in dealing with this filthy product of modernity."<ref>{{cite web |last1=Hodgkins |first1=Chris |title=BBC Charter Review Consultation Response |url=https://www.chrishodgkins.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2015/01/BBC-Charter-Review-Consultation-Response-6th-October-2015.pdf |website=CHRIS HODGKINS |access-date=28 September 2020}}</ref><ref>{{cite book |last1=Leishman |first1=Marista |title=My Father: Reith of the BBC |date=2008 |publisher=Saint Andrew |location=Edinburgh |isbn=978-0715208571}}</ref>

==Post-war==
===1950s: Claimed involvement in Iranian coup d'état===
A BBC Radio 4 documentary in 2005 claimed that it had evidence that a radio newsreader inserted the word "exactly" into a midnight timecheck one summer night in 1953, as "It is now exactly midnight". This was said to be a code word to [[Mohammad Reza Pahlavi]], the [[Shah]] of Iran, that Britain supported [[1953 Iranian coup d'état|his plans for a coup]]. The Shah had selected the word, the documentary said, and the BBC broadcast the word at the request of the government. Officially, the BBC has never acknowledged the code word plot. The BBC spokesman declined to comment on a possible connection.<ref name="BBCRadio4Document">{{cite episode|url=https://www.bbc.co.uk/radio4/history/document/document_20050822.shtml|date=22 August 2005 |title=A Very British Coup |series=Document |network=BBC |station=[[BBC Radio 4|Radio 4]] |access-date=25 March 2009| archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20090222142305/http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio4/history/document/document_20050822.shtml| archive-date= 22 February 2009 | url-status= live}}</ref><ref name="iran.bbc.persian">{{cite news|url=http://www.cnn.com/2009/WORLD/meast/01/21/iran.bbc.persian/|title=Iran declares BBC Persian TV illegal|access-date=25 March 2009 |publisher=CNN | date=21 January 2009| archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20090318161607/http://www.cnn.com/2009/WORLD/meast/01/21/iran.bbc.persian/| archive-date= 18 March 2009 | url-status= live}}</ref>

===1950s: Independent television controversy===
Winston Churchill's government passed the [[Television Act 1954]] that permitted the creation of the first commercial television network in Britain, [[ITV (TV network)|ITV]]. This was criticised in the House of Lords by, among others, Lord Reith.<ref>[https://api.parliament.uk/historic-hansard/lords/1954/jul/01/television-bill HL Deb 01 July 1954 vol 188 cc316-415]</ref> Churchill explained to his doctor, [[Charles Wilson, 1st Baron Moran|Lord Moran]]: "I am against the monopoly enjoyed by the BBC. For eleven years they kept me off the air. They prevented me from expressing views which have proved to be right. Their behaviour has been tyrannical. They are honeycombed with Socialists&mdash;probably with Communists".<ref>Moran, Charles Wilson, Lord ''Winston Churchill: The Struggle for Survival, 1940–1965'' (London: Sphere, 1968), p. 416.</ref><ref name=Wilson>{{cite book|author=H. Hubert Wilson|title=Pressure group: the campaign for commercial television in England|url=https://archive.org/details/pressuregroupcam0000wils|url-access=registration|year=1961|publisher=Rutgers University Press}}</ref>

===1964: "Clean Up TV campaign"===
[[Mary Whitehouse]] launched her 'Clean Up TV campaign' in April 1964. In her view, [[Hugh Greene]] as BBC Director General was "more than anybody else ... responsible for the moral collapse in this country."<ref>{{cite web|author=Dennis Barker |url=https://www.theguardian.com/media/2001/nov/24/guardianobituaries.obituaries |title=Mary Whitehouse: Self-appointed campaigner against the permissive society on television |work=The Guardian |date=24 November 2001}}</ref> The campaign of Whitehouse and her supporters soon became the [[National Viewers' and Listeners' Association]]; Mrs Whitehouse was opposed to the policies of liberalisation pursued by Greene and largely sustained by his successors at the Corporation. Whitehouse's campaign focused much more on the BBC than on ITV, and she had a high public profile for several decades. The tabloid press also criticised the BBC for what it perceived as lapses in programming quality.

===1965: ''The War Game''===
''[[The War Game]]'', directed by [[Peter Watkins]], is a [[pseudo-documentary]] recounting the aftermath of a fictional attack on London with a one-megaton nuclear bomb. Intended for the twentieth anniversary on 6 August 1965 of the [[Atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki|dropping of the bomb on Hiroshima]], ''The War Game'' was banned by the BBC, which said it was "too horrifying for the medium of broadcasting". The chairman of the BBC board of governors, [[Lord Normanbrook]], wrote in a secret letter to the cabinet secretary, [[Burke Trend]], that "The showing of the film on television might have a significant effect on public attitudes towards the policy of the nuclear deterrent".<ref name="Pilger1">{{cite news|first=John|last=Pilger|url=http://www.newstatesman.com/world-affairs/world-affairs/2012/11/gaza-savaged-again-understanding-bbcs-role-requires-more-sentim|title=As Gaza is savaged again, understanding the BBC's role requires more than sentiment|work=[[New Statesman]]|date=22 November 2012|access-date=24 January 2014}}</ref> Although given a limited cinema release by the [[British Film Institute]] (BFI), and awarded an Oscar as Best Documentary, the film was not screened by the BBC until 1985.<ref name="Pilger1"/>

In 2012, [[John Pilger]] wrote that, in banning Watkins' film, the BBC was performing "the function of the state broadcaster as a cornerstone of Britain's ruling elite".<ref name="Pilger1"/>

===1969: Enhanced subscriptions===
In 1969, [[Reuters]] agreed to open a reporting service in the Middle East as part of a [[British Foreign Office]] plan to influence the international media. In order to protect the reputation of Reuters, which may have been damaged if the funding from the British government became known, the BBC paid Reuters "enhanced subscriptions" for access to its news service, and was in turn compensated by the British government for the extra expense. The BBC paid Reuters £350,000 over four years under the plan.<ref>{{cite news |last1=Rosenbaum |first1=Martin |title=How the UK secretly funded a Middle East news agency |url=https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-50637200 |access-date=16 January 2020 |publisher=BBC |date=13 January 2020}}</ref>

===1971: ''Yesterday's Men''===
''[[Yesterday's Men (TV programme)|Yesterday's Men]]'' is a BBC documentary first broadcast in June 1971<ref>Sources vary as to whether the programme was transmitted on 16 or 17 June 1971.</ref> about the former ministers of [[Harold Wilson]]'s Labour government who were now experiencing opposition.<ref name="Wilby">{{cite web|author=David Wilby |url=https://www.bbc.co.uk/historyofthebbc/resources/bbcandgov/pdf/yesterday.pdf |title=Yesterday's Men 1971 |publisher=BBC |year=2006 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140222154506/http://www.bbc.co.uk/historyofthebbc/resources/bbcandgov/pdf/yesterday.pdf |archive-date=22 February 2014}}</ref> The approach of the programme makers, who included reporter [[David Dimbleby]], angered Wilson and the [[Labour Party (UK)|Labour Party]] who saw it as displaying explicit Conservative bias. According to the official History of the BBC web page on the incident, the Labour politicians were "effectively tricked into taking part in a programme that would ridicule them".<ref>[https://web.archive.org/web/20100611010551/http://www.bbc.co.uk/historyofthebbc/resources/bbcandgov/yesterdays_men.shtml ''Yesterday's Men'' (1971)], History of the BBC</ref> During his own interview Wilson was asked by Dimbleby, in an untransmitted section of their encounter, about the money he had made from his memoirs, a question which led to a furious exchange between them.<ref>{{cite book|last=Simpson|first=John|title=Unreliable Sources: How the 20th Century was Reported|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=zypBsOadOx8C&pg=PA441|year=2010|publisher=Macmillan|isbn=978-1-4050-5005-0|page=441}}</ref> Wilson wanted the programme shelved, but it was broadcast with minor changes.<ref name="Wilby"/>

==1979–2000==
===1979: The Troubles / ''Panorama''===
In November 1979, ''[[Panorama (British TV programme)|Panorama]]'' showed masked IRA men manning a roadblock in [[Carrickmore]].<ref>Tim Pat Coogan, ''The Troubles: Ireland's Ordeal 1966–1995 and the Search for Peace'' (London: Arrow, 1996), p. 369.</ref> The Army and the [[Royal Ulster Constabulary]] withdrew their cooperation immediately and the Unionist leader [[James Molyneaux]] claimed that the filming was "at least a treasonable activity".<ref>Coogan, p. 370.</ref> The BBC governors issued a statement which blamed the ''Panorama'' team and admitted that the filming of the IRA roadblock "would appear to be a clear breach of standing instructions in relation to filming in Ireland".<ref>Coogan, pp. 369–370.</ref> In the House of Commons the Conservative MP [[Tim Eggar]] requested that the Prime Minister, [[Margaret Thatcher]], "contact the governors of the BBC to express extreme concern about the way in which the ''Panorama'' team seems to have encouraged the IRA to break the law in Northern Ireland".<ref name="Hansard8Nov" >[https://api.parliament.uk/historic-hansard/commons/1979/nov/08/prime-minister-engagements HC Deb 08 November 1979 vol 973 cc606-13]</ref> Thatcher replied that the government contacted the BBC about the programme: "My hon. Friend will know that this is not the first time that we have had occasion to raise similar matters with the BBC. My right hon. Friend the Home Secretary and I think that it is time that the BBC put its house in order".<ref name="Hansard8Nov" />

===1982: Falklands War===
During the [[Falklands War]], the Prime Minister [[Margaret Thatcher]] and some Conservative MPs believed that the BBC was excessively even-handed between Britain and Argentina, referring to "the British" and "the Argentines" instead of "our forces" and "the enemy".<ref>John Campbell, ''Margaret Thatcher, Volume Two: The Iron Lady'' (London: Jonathan Cape, 2003), p. 156, p. 402.</ref><ref name="Hansard6May">[https://api.parliament.uk/historic-hansard/commons/1982/may/06/engagements HC Deb 06 May 1982 vol 23 cc278-82]</ref>

On 2 May, during a report for ''[[Newsnight]]'', [[Peter Snow]] remarked: "Until the British are demonstrated either to be deceiving us or to be concealing losses, we can only tend to give a lot more credence to the British version of events".<ref>[[Cynthia Carter]] and [[C. Kay Weaver]], ''Violence And The Media'' (Buckingham: Open University Press, 2003), p. 25.</ref> The Conservative MP [[John Page (MP for Harrow West)|John Page]] complained that the programme was "totally offensive and almost treasonable".<ref>Valerie Adams, ''The Media and the Falklands Campaign'' (London: Palgrave Macmillan, 1986), p. 9.</ref> Answering a question from Page on 6 May, Thatcher said that "many people are very concerned indeed that the case for our British forces is not being put over fully and effectively. I understand that there are times when it seems that we and the Argentines are being treated almost as equals and almost on a neutral basis. I understand that there are occasions when some commentators will say that the Argentines did something and then "the British" did something. I can only say that if this is so it gives offence and causes great emotion among many people".<ref name="Hansard6May" /> ''The Sun'' newspaper published an editorial on 7 May titled "Dare Call it Treason: There are Traitors in Our Midst" which criticised Snow.<ref>Carter and Weaver, p. 25.</ref> The ''[[Daily Mirror]]'' came to Snow's defence in an editorial titled 'The Harlot of Fleet Street', calling ''The Sun'' "coarse and demented" and that it had "fallen from the gutter to the sewer...The Sun today is to journalism what Dr Joseph Goebbels was to truth".<ref>Roy Greenslade, '[https://www.theguardian.com/media/2002/feb/25/pressandpublishing.falklands A new Britain, a new kind of newspaper]', ''The Guardian'' (25 February 2002). Retrieved 3 August 2018.</ref>

The 10 May edition of ''Panorama'' (titled "Can We Avoid War?") also provoked outrage.<ref>Greg Philo (ed.), ''The Glasgow Media Group Reader, Vol. II: Industry, Economy, War and Politics'' (London: Routledge, 1995), p. 131.</ref><ref>BBC.co.uk, '[https://web.archive.org/web/20180211043651/http://www.bbc.co.uk/historyofthebbc/research/culture/bbc-and-gov/falklands The Falklands Conflict 1982]'. Retrieved 24 February 2018.</ref> The day after it was broadcast, the Conservative MP [[Sally Oppenheim]] asked Thatcher in the Commons: "Is she aware that for the most part, but not all, it was an odious, subversive, travesty in which [[Michael Cockerell]] and other BBC reporters dishonoured the right to freedom of speech in this country?"<ref name="Hansard11May">[https://api.parliament.uk/historic-hansard/commons/1982/may/11/engagements HC Deb 11 May 1982 vol 23 cc596-602]</ref> Thatcher responded: "I share the deep concern that has been expressed on many sides, particularly about the content of yesterday evening's "Panorama" programme. I know how strongly many people feel that the case for our country is not being put with sufficient vigour on certain—I do not say all—BBC programmes. The chairman of the BBC has assured us, and has said in vigorous terms, that the BBC is not neutral on this point, and I hope that his words will be heeded by the many who have responsibilities for standing up for our task force, our boys, our people and the cause of democracy".<ref name="Hansard11May" /><ref>Campbell, p. 402.</ref>

According to the commander of the British Naval Task Force, [[Sandy Woodward]], while the British were preparing to land on [[San Carlos, Falkland Islands|San Carlos]] the BBC World Service broadcast that the Battle Group and Amphibious Group of the Task Force had joined up. Woodward later wrote: "I had hoped that this particular rendezvous at least could have remained a military secret until after the actual landing, but as ever the British media were more interested in the truth than in the consequences for our own people. We were infuriated".<ref>Admiral Sandy Woodward, ''One Hundred Days'' (London: HarperPress, 2012), pp. 341–342.</ref> Some on the Task Force said that "if we got hit on the way and lost a lot of men, the Director General of the BBC should be charged with treason".<ref name="Woodward, p. 342">Woodward, p. 342.</ref> Shortly before the [[Battle of Goose Green|attack on Goose Green]], the BBC broadcast that an attack was imminent and that the [[2nd Battalion, Parachute Regiment|2 Para regiment]] were within five miles of [[Darwin, Falkland Islands|Darwin]]. According to Woodward, there "are still some who believe that BBC report was directly responsible for the Argentinian 'ambush' in which [[H. Jones|Colonel Jones]] and many others died. Standing in the Ops Room of ''[[HMS Hermes (R12)|Hermes]]'' on the day the BBC effectively informed the Args of our position and bearing, I am sure we all felt the same".<ref name="Woodward, p. 342"/> Thatcher later wrote: "Many of the public (including us) did not like the attitude [of the media] particularly the BBC...My concern was always the safety of our forces. Theirs was news".<ref>Charles Moore, ''Margaret Thatcher, Volume One: Not For Turning'' (London: Allen Lane, 2013), pp. 739–740.</ref> She was also angry about the BBC's disclosure of 2 Para's position: "Can there ever have been an army which had to fight its battles against media reporting like that?"<ref>Moore, ''Volume One'', p. 740.</ref>

===1984: "Maggie's Militant Tendency" controversy===

In January 1984 the BBC programme ''Panorama'' broadcast "Maggie's Militant Tendency" which claimed that a number of [[Conservative Party (UK)|Conservative]] MPs including ([[Neil Hamilton (politician)|Neil Hamilton]], [[Harvey Proctor]] and [[Gerald Howarth]]) had links to far-right organisations both in Britain and on the Continent.{{sfn | Moore | 2015 | p=}}{{rp|532}}

The programme was based on an internal Conservative Party report compiled by Phil Pedley, Chairman of the Young Conservatives.  ''Panorama'' confirmed its status with a senior Conservative Party vice chairman. The report was formally presented to the party in the week before the programme was aired. During the making of the programme, attempts to contact some of the named MPs for comment were unsuccessful. (Hamilton's wife Christine later described how "Neil and I had devised a method for making sure that ''Panorama'' personnel would not be in a position to say that Neil had refused to speak.") <ref>Richard Lindley 'Panorama' (Politico's 2002) p.254</ref> The programme was vetted prior to transmission by the BBC's lawyers, by the Head of Currents Affairs Television, and by the Chief Assistant to the Director General, Margaret Douglas

Two of the MPs named in the programme (Hamilton and Howarth) sued the BBC and the programme-makers. The Director-General, [[Alasdair Milne]], reviewed the BBC's own legal advice, and that of his Chief Assistant, and declared the programme to be 'rock solid'.  The Board of Governors (Chairman Stuart Young) also gave its backing for the programme to be defended in court. Stuart Young died in August 1986, two months before the libel case against ''Panorama'' came to trial. A new chairman, Marmaduke Hussey, had been appointed, but had not formally arrived at the BBC when the trial opened on 13 October 1986. Hussey nevertheless spoke with the BBC's barrister, Charles Grey.  Hussey says in his memoirs that 'Grey thought it unlikely the BBC would win.'  Sir Charles Grey disputes this statement, saying that 'my junior and I both thought the case was winnable'.<ref>Richard Lindley 'Panorama' (Politico's 2002), p.254</ref>

The first four days of the trial were given over to opening statements from Hamilton and Howarth and their lawyers, which received wide press coverage.  On the evening of the fourth day the BBC's Assistant DG Alan Protheroe informed the BBC's legal team and the named defendants that the Governors now wished to settle the case immediately. This prevented the BBC's defence from being put to the court, or known to the public.<ref>Richard Lindley 'Panorama' (Politico's 2002), p.255</ref>

Hamilton and Howarth were each awarded £25,000 in damages. Costs amounted to £240,000. They dropped their case against Phil Pedley.{{citation needed|date=February 2021}}

There was controversy over the editing of one part of the programme which juxtaposed shots of Howarth wearing a train driver's uniform at a steam railway enthusiasts' rally with the claim that he had attended a fascist meeting in Italy, implying that the uniform he was wearing was a fascist one.{{sfn | Moore | 2015 | p=}}{{rp|533}} This issue was also not dealt with in court.

===1984: Falsified coverage of miners' strike===
{{Main|Battle of Orgreave}}

Footage of the so-called "Battle of Orgreave" on 18 June 1984 had been filmed by a crew from the BBC. When this appeared on [[Battle of Orgreave#Media coverage|that evening's BBC news bulletins]], it was edited and broadcast out of chronological sequence, falsely showing pickets throwing stones at the police and the police subsequently carrying out a mounted charge.<ref>{{cite news|title=We were fed lies about the violence at Orgreave. Now we need the truth |first=David|last=Conn|author-link=David Conn|date=22 July 2015|work=[[The Guardian]]|location=London|url=https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/jul/22/orgreave-truth-police-miners-strike|access-date=5 May 2016}}</ref><ref>{{cite journal|title=Better to have fought...|first=Liz|last=Davies|journal=[[Socialist Lawyer]]|issue=52|date=June 2009|page=3|jstor=42950327|issn= 0954-3635}}</ref><ref name="milne2">{{cite news|title=Battle for Orgreave revealed crude riot tactics that caused hundreds of injuries while 48-day trial exposed lies about arrests of pickets|work=[[The Guardian]]|location=London|date=20 June 1991|first=Seumas|last=Milne|author-link=Seumas Milne|url=http://link.galegroup.com/apps/doc/A171184737/STND?sid=wikipedia|via=[[InfoTrac]]|url-access=subscription |access-date=12 October 2016}}</ref><ref name="insideout">{{cite web |url= https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b01nj32j |title=Inside Out: Yorkshire and Lincolnshire|work=[[BBC One]]|date=22 October 2012|access-date=12 May 2016}}</ref>

===1985: The Troubles / Ban of McGuiness interview===
In 1985, the government made an 'unprecedented' public request to stop the broadcast of a programme on extremism in Northern Ireland, in particular it included an interview with [[Martin McGuiness]], then reputedly a member of the [[Irish Republican Army|IRA]]—but also of the [[Northern Ireland Assembly (1982)|Ulster National Assembly]], the provincial legislature approved by London.<ref name="DeYoung 1985 h449">{{cite news | last=DeYoung | first=Karen | title=BBC World Service Falls Silent | newspaper=The Washington Post |publication-place=London| date=7 August 1985 | url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/politics/1985/08/07/bbc-world-service-falls-silent/057453eb-f526-49f4-962c-8fb8045c2ab6/ | access-date=31 March 2024}}</ref>

The Home Secretary at the time, [[Leon Brittan]] wrote in a letter to the Board of Governors that the program was "against the national interest" elaborating: {{sic|"even if the program and any surrounding material were as a whole to present terrorist organizations in a wholly unfavorable light, I would still ask you not to permit it to be broadcast."}}<ref name="DeYoung 1985 h449" />{{efn|The Washington Post here obviously didn't bother to keep the probable original British spelling of the quote. A 'correction' like it, in 2003, led to initial scrutiny against [[The Observer]]'s reporting on the leak of [[Katharine Gun]].<ref name="Mowbray 2019 r701">{{cite web | last=Mowbray | first=Nicole | title='You've caused an international incident': how my work mistake came back to haunt me | website=The Guardian | date=27 July 2019 | url=https://www.theguardian.com/film/2019/jul/27/international-incident-work-mistake-official-secrets-film | access-date=31 March 2024}}</ref>}}

The whole of the BBC's staff protested against the decision. This saw mass-resignations of senior management and a 24-hour strike that forced news bulletins on the home services to be read by management and saw the [[World Service]], broadcasting in 36 languages at the time, shut down completely for the first time.<ref name="DeYoung 1985 h449" />

All that would be broadcast on the foreign services was the repeat of a statement, an excerpt of which reads as: "in protest against the decision by the BBC board of Governors to withdraw a television documentary about extremism in Northern Ireland following a request by the British government", followed by music.<ref name="DeYoung 1985 h449" />

===1986: Libyan raid controversy===
The ''[[BBC News at Six]]'' reporting of the [[1986 United States bombing of Libya|American bombing raid on Libya]] outraged Thatcher and Conservative Party Chairman [[Norman Tebbit]] because they believed it accepted the Libyan government's propaganda about civilian casualties and because it gave no airtime to American or British spokesmen to explain their governments' stances.{{sfn | Moore | 2015 | p=}}{{rp|533}} Tebbit ordered [[Conservative Central Office]] to compile a dossier on the BBC's reporting and then to hand it to the lawyer [[Lord Goodman]] for a critique. Goodman's critique largely agreed with the dossier's findings and on 30 October Tebbit submitted it to Lord Barnett, saying that the BBC's coverage was "a mixture of news, views, speculations, error and uncritical carriage of Libyan propaganda which does serious damage to the reputation of the BBC".{{sfn | Moore | 2015 | pp=}}{{rp|533–534}} The BBC rejected its findings.{{sfn | Moore | 2015 | p=}}{{rp|535}}

===1986: ''Secret Society'' controversy===
{{Main|Zircon affair}}

In 1986, BBC journalists went on strike to protest against police raids in search of evidence that a BBC television series in production, ''Secret Society'', had endangered national security. The police searched the BBC studios in [[Glasgow]], Scotland, the London home of investigative journalist [[Duncan Campbell (journalist, born 1952)|Duncan Campbell]], and the ''[[New Statesman]]'' offices.<ref>{{cite web |url=https://www.bbc.com/historyofthebbc/research/editorial-independence/zircon-affair/ |title=The Zircon Affair 1986-7 – History of the BBC|publisher=BBC}}</ref>

On 12 June 1985, the controller of [[BBC2]], [[Graeme MacDonald]], was offered a series of documentaries by the BBC studios in Scotland in conjunction with an offer to them by Duncan Campbell whose work had previously appeared in the ''New Statesman'' magazine. The programmes were six half-hour films by Duncan Campbell (researched and presented by Campbell and produced according to BBC standards), which illuminated "hidden truths of major public concern". The six programmes were:
* One: ''The Secret Constitution'' about a small, secret Cabinet committee that was in reality the Establishment that ruled the United Kingdom.{{Citation needed|date=October 2008}}
* Two: ''In Time of Crisis'' about secret preparations for war that began in 1982 within every [[NATO]] country. This programme revealed what Britain would do.
* Three: ''A Gap In Our Defences'' about bungling defence manufacturers and incompetent military planners who have botched every new [[radar]] system that Britain has installed since World War II.{{Citation needed|date=October 2008}}
* Four: ''We're All Data Now'' about the [[Data Protection Act 1984]].{{Citation needed|date=October 2008}}
* Five: Unfinished – about the [[Association of Chief Police Officers]] and how government policy and actions are determined in the fields of law and order.{{Citation needed|date=October 2008}}
* Six: Unfinished – about communications with particular reference to satellites.{{Citation needed|date=October 2008}}

Work began on the series. In April 1986 Alan Protheroe, acting on behalf of BBC Director General [[Alasdair Milne]] was asked for permission to [[Covert listening device|bug]] a private detective who said he could access a [[Criminal Records Office]] computer. Permission was granted and filming took place. The police were informed and the man was subsequently charged under Section 2 of the [[Official Secrets Act 1911]].{{Citation needed|date=October 2008}}

The sixth programme would have revealed details of a top secret spy satellite and Alisdair Milne had already decided to cut it from the line-up when ''[[The Observer]]'' newspaper broke the story on 18 January 1987 with the headline: "BBC gag on £500M defence secret". Combined with this story was a report that the [[Home Office]] intended to restrict the [[broadcast receiver licence]] fee, the implication being that the government had decided to censor BBC investigative journalism.{{Citation needed|date=October 2008}}

Soon afterwards, a series of programmes on BBC Radio Four called ''My Country Right or Wrong'' was banned by the government because it might have revealed sensitive secrets. The series was censored only a few hours before it was due to start because it dealt with similar issues to the television series concerning the British "secret state". However, it was eventually broadcast uncut, after the government decided that it did not breach any laws or interfere with national security.<ref>{{Cite book|last=Wilkinson|first=Nicholas John|title=Secrecy and the Media: The Official History of the United Kingdom's D Notice System|publisher=Routledge|year=2009|location=Abingdon|pages=422}}</ref>

===1987: Sacked director general controversy===
On 29 January 1987, Alasdair Milne was sacked by the newly appointed chairman of the BBC Board of Governors, [[Marmaduke Hussey]]. He was replaced by a senior BBC accountant, [[Michael Checkland]]. Milne later wrote his account of this affair in ''The Memoirs of a British Broadcaster''.<ref>{{cite book|last=Milne|first=Alasdair|title=DG: The Memoirs of a British Broadcaster |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=9-GPHAAACAAJ|year=1989|publisher=Coronet|isbn=978-0-340-49750-0}}</ref>

===1988–1994: The Troubles / voice restrictions===
{{Main|1988–1994 British broadcasting voice restrictions}}

On 19 October 1988, Conservative [[Home Secretary]] [[Douglas Hurd]] under Prime Minister [[Margaret Thatcher]] issued a notice under clause 13(4) of the BBC Licence and Agreement to the BBC and under section 29(3) of the [[Broadcasting Act 1981]] to the [[Independent Broadcasting Authority]] prohibiting the broadcast of direct statements by representatives or supporters of eleven Irish political and military organisations.<ref name="glasgow48">{{cite book|title=Glasgow Media Group Reader: Industry, Economy, War and Politics|page=48|volume=2|publisher=Psychology Press|first1=John Eric Thomas|last1=Eldridge|first2=Greg|last2=Philo|year=1995|isbn=9780415130363|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=vo4FQX4B-msC&pg=PA48}}</ref><ref>{{cite book|title=Political Debate and the Role of the Media: The Fragility of Free Speech|at=p 91 footnote 14|publisher=[[European Audiovisual Observatory]]|isbn=978-92-871-5675-4|year=2004|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=vPXw-8wmitQC&pg=PA91}}</ref> The ban lasted until 1994, and denied the UK news media the right to broadcast the voices, though not the words, of all [[Irish republican]] and loyalist paramilitaries, while the ban was targeted primarily at [[Sinn Féin]].<ref>{{cite news|title=The 'broadcast ban' on Sinn Féin|work=BBC News|first=Francis|last=Welch|date=5 April 2005|url=https://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/4409447.stm}}</ref>

Government intimidation and laws before the ban had already resulted in forms of [[self-censorship]].<ref name="glasgow48"/> An [[Irish National Liberation Army|INLA]] interview in July 1979 on BBC's ''Tonight'' caused a controversy involving Prime Minister Thatcher and was the last time such an interview was heard on British television.<ref name="glasgow47">{{cite book|title=Glasgow Media Group Reader: Industry, Economy, War and Politics|page=47|volume=2|publisher=Psychology Press|first1=John Eric Thomas|last1=Eldridge|first2=Greg|last2=Philo|year=1995|isbn=9780415130363|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=vo4FQX4B-msC&pg=PA48}}</ref> The 1979 ''Panorama'' film of the IRA on patrol in [[Carrickmore]] was seized by police under the [[Prevention of Terrorism Acts]] in 1980 following an outcry in parliament and the press.<ref name="glasgow4748">{{cite book|title=Glasgow Media Group Reader: Industry, Economy, War and Politics|pages=47–48|volume=2|publisher=Psychology Press|first1=John Eric Thomas|last1=Eldridge|first2=Greg|last2=Philo|year=1995|isbn=9780415130363|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=vo4FQX4B-msC&pg=PA48}}</ref> In 1985 an edition of BBC's ''Real Lives'' series ("At the Edge of the Union") was temporarily withdrawn under government pressure. BBC governors found themselves in conflict with management and the corporation's journalists went on strike for a day. The programme was later transmitted with minor changes.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.bbc.co.uk/historyofthebbc/research/culture/bbc-and-gov/real-lives |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150805020237/http://www.bbc.co.uk/historyofthebbc/research/culture/bbc-and-gov/real-lives |url-status=dead |archive-date=5 August 2015 |title=Real Lives 1985: At the Edge of the Union |publisher=BBC}}</ref>

Coverage of Sinn Féin by the BBC before the ban was minimal. In 1988 Sinn Féin was only heard or seen on television 93 times, had only 17 of the 633 formal BBC interviews as compared to 121 interviews with the [[Conservative Party (UK)|Conservative Party]] and 172 with the [[Royal Ulster Constabulary]] and the civil service, and were never interviewed in the studio like many other participants.<ref name="glasgow56">{{cite book|title=Glasgow Media Group Reader: Industry, Economy, War and Politics|page=56|volume=2|publisher=Psychology Press|first1=John Eric Thomas|last1=Eldridge|first2=Greg|last2=Philo|year=1995|isbn=9780415130363|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=vo4FQX4B-msC&pg=PA56}}</ref> However, after the ban there was a steep decline in coverage of Sinn Féin and republican viewpoints, with television appearances being reduced to 34 times in the following year, and the delays and uncertainties caused by ambiguities, voice-overs and subtitles often lead to coverage and films being dropped entirely.<ref name="glasgow5657">{{cite book|title=Glasgow Media Group Reader: Industry, Economy, War and Politics|pages=56–57|volume=2|publisher=Psychology Press|first1=John Eric Thomas|last1=Eldridge|first2=Greg|last2=Philo|year=1995|isbn=9780415130363|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=vo4FQX4B-msC&pg=PA56}}</ref>

The BBC's Head of Editorial Policy, [[Richard Ayre]], looked for ways to allow the continuation of news reporting on the subject, during a time when '[[The Troubles]]' in Northern Ireland were a matter of great importance and interest. He established that the ban could not prevent the BBC's use of actors to speak Adams' and other Republicans' words. The net effect of the ban was to increase publicity.<ref>{{Cite web|title=BBC – Northern Ireland Chronicle – Learning Lessons, Richard Ayre|url=https://www.bbc.co.uk/northernireland/archive/chronicle/1970s/essay2.shtml|access-date=25 June 2020|publisher=BBC}}</ref>

The restrictions were lifted on 16 September 1994, two weeks after the first Provisional Irish Republican Army ceasefire (declared on 31 August 1994).

===1998: Richard Bacon cocaine controversy===
On 18 October 1998, a presenter of the children's television programme ''[[Blue Peter]]'', [[Richard Bacon (TV presenter)|Richard Bacon]], was in the headlines when it emerged he had taken [[cocaine]]. He was released from his BBC contract immediately.<ref name="Bacon">{{cite news |first=Silver |last=James |title=I should be out of work |url=https://www.theguardian.com/media/2007/nov/19/mondaymediasection.bbc |work=The Guardian |location=Clerkenwell, London| page=5 (Media Guardian) |date=19 November 2007 |access-date=3 July 2008 }}</ref><ref>{{cite news |title=''Blue Peter'' Presenter Sacked |url=https://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/entertainment/195947.stm |publisher=BBC |date=18 October 1998 |access-date=3 July 2008 }}</ref>

==2001–2010==
=== 2003–2004: Intelligence on Iraq and the death of David Kelly ===
In 2003, the BBC aired allegations of the government ordering the falsification of an intelligence report on [[weapons of mass destruction in Iraq]].{{efn|For historical context: The United States justified their [[2003 invasion of Iraq]] by falsely claiming the Iraqis to be in possession of [[Weapon of mass destruction|WMD]]s. The British government at the time had little reason to believe that information to be erroneous; and especially not for it to be falsified by the Americans.}} The government strongly denied the accusation. The following battle between government and broadcaster saw the BBC's source of information [[Dr David Kelly]] commit suicide, and, in the subsequent [[Hutton Inquiry]], the resignation of the prime minister's director of communications during the inquiry, then, upon publication of its findings, the resignation of both the Chair of the BBC as well as its Director-General and, eventually, the resignation of the accuser himself. The BBC's online history of itself describes it as "one of the most damaging episodes in the BBC's history".<ref name="BBC 2021 m639">{{cite web | title=Iraq, Gilligan, Kelly and the Hutton Report | publisher=BBC | date=12 January 2021 | url=https://www.bbc.co.uk/historyofthebbc/research/editorial-independence/hutton-report | access-date=30 March 2024}}</ref>

On 29 May 2003, [[BBC Radio 4]]'s defence correspondent [[Andrew Gilligan]] quoted a government official, later revealed to be [[Dr David Kelly]], on the  [[Today (BBC Radio 4)|''Today'' programme]] to have said that the British government had "sexed up" a dossier concerning [[weapons of mass destruction]] in Iraq, against the wishes of the intelligence services.<ref name="BBC 2021 m639" /> In a follow-up article Gillain wrote for [[The Mail on Sunday]] he further claimed that [[Alastair Campbell]] (the Prime Minister's Director of Communications and Strategy), was responsible.{{sfn | Scott | 2004}}

Later, [[Dr David Kelly]], a [[Ministry of Defence (United Kingdom)|Ministry of Defence]] scientist, was named as the source of the news item, which led to official sources suggesting that Dr Kelly was not a credible source. The subsequent suicide of Dr Kelly resulted in an escalation of the conflict between the government and the BBC, during which both sides received severe criticism for their roles in the matter.<ref>{{Cite news |last=Dodd |first=Vikram |date=2013-07-16 |title=Dr David Kelly: 10 years on, death of scientist remains unresolved for some |url=https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2013/jul/16/david-kelly-death-10-years-on |access-date=2025-02-20 |work=The Guardian |language=en-GB |issn=0261-3077}}</ref>

The row saw the BBC publish pieces such as ''Campbell wanted source revealed'',<ref>{{cite news
 |url=https://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/politics/3129360.stm
 |title=Campbell wanted source revealed
 |work=BBC News
 |publisher=BBC
 |location=London
 |date=22 September 2003
|access-date=22 September 2013
|archive-date=2 February 2011
|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110202024252/http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/politics/3129360.stm
 |url-status=live
}}</ref> 
detailing forcefully written diary entries made available in the Hutton Inquiry, leading to Campbell's resignation. In concert with their coverage of the resignation,<ref name="BBC NEWS 2003 g428">{{cite web | title=Alastair Campbell quits | website=BBC NEWS | date=29 August 2003 | url=https://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/politics/3191937.stm | access-date=30 March 2024}}</ref> the BBC but the boot in, publishing a poorly authored profile on Campbell, which featured suggestions of his success stemming from having given up alcohol, other less than relevant details and most unflattering photographs.<ref name="BBC NEWS 2003 n769">{{cite web | title=Profile: Alastair Campbell | website=BBC NEWS | date=29 August 2003 | url=https://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/politics/3028250.stm | access-date=30 March 2024}}</ref> None of the following inquiries would find cases of wrongdoing going beyond 'mistakes' on Campbell's behalf.

The January 2004 findings of the [[Hutton Inquiry]] into Dr Kelly's death were extremely critical of [[Andrew Gilligan]] as well as of the corporation's management processes and standards of journalism.<ref name="Morris 2004" /> In the aftermath, both the chairman of the BBC [[Gavyn Davies]] and the Director-General [[Greg Dyke]] resigned, followed by Gilligan himself.<ref name="BBC 2021 m639" /> Following the release, [[Brian Hutton, Baron Hutton|Lord Hutton]] was accused of failing to take account the imperfections inherent in journalism, while giving the government the benefit of the doubt. Large parts of the media at the time branded the report a [[Whitewash (censorship)|whitewash]].<ref>{{cite news|url=http://edition.cnn.com/2004/WORLD/europe/01/29/hutton.press/ |title=UK press mauls Hutton 'whitewash' |publisher=CNN |date=29 January 2004 |access-date=11 November 2012}}</ref>

Upon publication of a second review by Lord Butler several months later [[The Independent]], in an article that carefully holds on to a healthy amount of scepticism, gave voice to Mr Gillian and Mr Dyke who held on to saying they had done the right thing in publishing and defending the initial story. The [[Butler Review]], among other findings on the intelligence on weapons of mass destruction as presented in the [[September Dossier]], had given a rather vague statement regarding the production of the [[Iraq Dossier]]:<ref name="Morris 2004">{{Cite news | first=Nigel | last=Morris|date=15 July 2004|title=BBC report on 'sexed up' dossier is vindicated, says Dyke|url=https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/bbc-report-on-sexed-up-dossier-is-vindicated-says-dyke-553214.html|access-date=25 June 2020|website=The Independent}}</ref>

<blockquote>"... the fact that the reference [to the 45 minute claim] in the classified assessment was repeated in the dossier later led to suspicions that it had been included because of its eye-catching character."</blockquote>

Scott, in 2004, suggested that an accessible explanation for the incident can be found by examining the parties' differing professional cultures.{{sfn | Scott | 2004}} Kelly sought to communicate scientific truth, Gillain sought to communicate the government's lacking argument, and Campbell sought to communicate the case for war in the most convincing way available.

===2004–2012: Balen Report===
{{Main|Balen Report}}

In 2012 the BBC won a year-long legal battle over the release of the Balen Report under the [[Freedom of Information Act 2000|Freedom of Information Act of 2000]] (FOI).<ref>{{Cite web|date=15 February 2012|title = Press Summary: Sugar (Deceased) (Represented by Fiona Paveley) (Appellant) v British Broadcasting Corporation (Respondent) [2012] UKSC 4|url=https://www.supremecourt.uk/cases/docs/uksc-2010-0145-press-summary.pdf|url-status=live|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210514232813/https://www.supremecourt.uk/cases/docs/uksc-2010-0145-press-summary.pdf|archive-date=14 May 2021|access-date=20 January 2023|publisher=[[Supreme Court of the United Kingdom]]}}</ref> It began in 2007 when the BBC decided to fight the Information Tribunal's initial decision to have the report released.<ref>[https://web.archive.org/web/20070712101510/http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/law/article1575543.ece BBC asks court to block Israel report] by Michael Herman (''Times'') 27 March 2007</ref>

It is a report on the BBC's Middle East coverage written in 2004,<ref name="Dovkants">{{Cite news |last=Dovkants |first=Keith |date=13 April 2012 |title=The secret report at heart of BBC's Gaza paranoia |work=[[Evening Standard]] |url=https://www.standard.co.uk/hp/front/the-secret-report-at-heart-of-bbc-s-gaza-paranoia-6870301.html# |access-date=20 January 2023}}</ref> and was commissioned by former BBC Director of News, [[Richard Sambrook]], following persistent complaints from the public and the Israeli government of allegations of anti-Israel bias.<ref>{{cite news|url=https://pressgazette.co.uk/publishers/broadcast/balen-report-foi-battle-goes-to-house-of-lords/|title=Balen Report FOI battle goes to House of Lords|work=[[Press Gazette]]|date = 27 May 2008|access-date=21 January 2023}}</ref><ref>{{cite news|url=http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/bbc-fights-to-suppress-internal-report-into-allegations-of-bias-against-israel-442150.html |title=BBC fights to suppress internal report into allegations of bias against Israel|author= McSmith, Andy| author-link = Andy McSmith|work=[[The Independent]]|date= 28 March 2007|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20080530005759/http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/bbc-fights-to-suppress-internal-report-into-allegations-of-bias-against-israel-442150.html |access-date=20 January 2023|archive-date=30 May 2008 }}</ref>

In August 2012, the politics website ''[[Robin_Shepherd#The_Commentator|The Commentator]]'' reported a Freedom of Information request they had made which indicated that the BBC had spent £330,000 in legal costs. This figure does not include BBC in-house legal staff time or [[Value Added Tax]].<ref name="TJC">Rocker, Simon (30 August 2012}. [https://www.thejc.com/news/uk/bbc-spent-330-000-supressing-balen-report-1.35530"BBC spent £330,000 suppressing Balen report"], ''[[The Jewish Chronicle]]''. Retrieved 23 January 2023.</ref>

===2004–2011: Siemens outsourcing===
In 2004, the [[BBC Governors]] approved a deal to [[outsource]] the BBC's IT, [[telephony]] and [[broadcast technology]] (which had previously been run by the corporation's internal BBC technology division) to the German engineering and electronics company [[Siemens IT Solutions and Services]] (SIS). It was claimed that the sale of BBC Technology would deliver over £30 million of savings to the BBC.<ref name="siemens-pr">{{cite web|title=BBC closes deal with Siemens|url=https://www.bbc.co.uk/pressoffice/pressreleases/stories/2004/10_october/01/technology.shtml|publisher=BBC Press Office|access-date=27 May 2013|date=1 October 2004}}</ref> In June 2007, a report published by the [[House of Commons of the United Kingdom|House of Commons]] [[Public Accounts Committee (United Kingdom)|Public Accounts Committee]] was critical of the deal, claiming that BBC management had omitted £60 million' worth of hidden costs in its application to the Board of Governors and that the profits to Siemens had not been taken into account. Recorded savings to the BBC had amounted to £22m, 38% lower than the BBC's original forecast.<ref name="guadrian-siemens">{{cite news|title=MPs slam BBC Siemens sell-off|url=https://www.theguardian.com/business/2007/jun/28/politicsandthemedia.bbc|access-date=27 May 2013|newspaper=The Guardian|date=28 June 2007|last=Johnson |first=Bobbie|location=London}}</ref><ref name="PAC-siemens">{{cite web|title=BBC outsourcing: the contract between the BBC and Siemens Business Service|url=https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200607/cmselect/cmpubacc/118/118.pdf|publisher=House of Commons Committee of Public Accounts|date=18 June 2007}}</ref>

The BBC's partnership with Siemens underwent some high-profile difficulties, including issues with the corporation-wide switchover to an [[IP telephony]] system in 2009;<ref>{{cite news|title=BBC braced for return to 'pre-digital' age as technology fails|url=https://www.theguardian.com/media/2009/nov/25/bbc-news-pre-digital-age|access-date=27 May 2013|newspaper=The Guardian|date=25 November 2009|location=London|first=John|last=Plunkett}}</ref> a major outage of the [[BBC website]] in 2011;<ref name="guardian-website-outage">{{cite news|last=Halliday|first=Josh|title=BBC and Siemens row over website failure|url=https://www.theguardian.com/media/2011/mar/30/bbc-siemens-website-outage|access-date=27 May 2013|newspaper=The Guardian|date=30 March 2011|location=London}}</ref> and Siemens was the original technology partner in the [[#dmi|Digital Media Initiative]] until its contract was terminated in 2009 (see below).<ref name="ITProPortal-dmi" /> In December 2010, SIS was acquired from Siemens by the French company [[Atos]] and BBC IT, broadcast and website systems are now managed by Atos.<ref name="bbc-2204">{{cite web|title=BBC announces Siemens Business Services as Single Preferred Bidder|url=https://www.bbc.co.uk/pressoffice/pressreleases/stories/2004/07_july/07/technology.shtml|work=BBC Press Office|access-date=4 June 2012}}</ref><ref name=ariel>{{cite news|title=New firm to support BBC IT|url=https://www.bbc.co.uk/ariel/14014213|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130703052344/http://www.bbc.co.uk/ariel/14014213|url-status=dead|archive-date=3 July 2013|access-date=27 May 2013|newspaper=Ariel (BBC)|date=4 July 2011}}</ref>

===March 2007: ''Blue Peter'' phone-in===
A phone-in competition supporting [[Unicef]], held by the children's programme ''[[Blue Peter]]'' in November 2006, was revealed to have been rigged. The winning caller in the competition was actually a visitor to the set who pretended to be calling from an outside line to select a prize. The competition was rigged because of a technical problem with receiving the calls.<ref>{{cite news
|url=https://www.theguardian.com/media/2007/mar/15/broadcastingethics.bbc
|title=Blue Peter admits rigging phone-in competition after technical hitch
|work=The Guardian |date=15 March 2007
| location=London
| first=Owen
| last=Gibson
| access-date=26 April 2010
}}</ref> The controversy was the beginning of a wider controversy in which other broadcasters were fined for [[2007 television phone-in scandals|faking telephone competitions]].<ref>{{cite news
|url=https://www.theguardian.com/media/tvfakery
|title=Broadcasting deception row
|work=The Guardian |date=2007–2008
| location=London
| access-date=26 April 2010
| archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20100408011812/http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/tvfakery| archive-date= 8 April 2010 | url-status= live}}</ref>

===March 2007: BBC Jam===
In 2006, the BBC launched a free educational website for children, [[BBC Jam]], which cost £150&nbsp;million. Following complaints by a number of commercial suppliers of educational software that the BBC was engaging in [[anti-competitive practices]] by providing this service for free, the BBC Trust announced that the website would be suspended pending a review.<ref>{{cite news
|url=https://www.bbc.co.uk/bbctrust/news/press_releases/14_03_2007.html
|archive-url=https://archive.today/20070317030215/http://www.bbc.co.uk/bbctrust/news/press_releases/14_03_2007.html
|url-status=dead
|archive-date=17 March 2007
|title=BBC Trust suspends BBC Jam
|publisher=BBC Trust
|date=14 March 2007}}</ref> The following year it was decided that the service would not be relaunched and it was closed permanently.<ref>{{cite news
|url=https://www.theguardian.com/media/2008/feb/28/bbc.digitalmedia
|title=No relaunch for £150m BBC Jam
|work=The Guardian |date=28 February 2008
|last=Gibson
|first=Owen
| location=London
}}
</ref>

===July 2007: ''A Year with the Queen''===
In early 2007, the BBC commissioned RDF Media to make a behind-the-scenes film about the monarchy, titled ''[[Monarchy: The Royal Family at Work]]'', for BBC One. A 60-second trailer was shown at the BBC1 autumn launch in London on 11 July. The trailer showed two clips of [[Queen Elizabeth II]]; one in which she tells photographer [[Annie Leibovitz]] that she will not remove her crown to make the scene look "less dressy", and another in which the Queen says "I'm not changing anything. I've done enough dressing like this".<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aKz6kWDfHpo  |archive-url=https://ghostarchive.org/varchive/youtube/20211212/aKz6kWDfHpo| archive-date=12 December 2021 |url-status=live|title=YouTube video of the trailer |via=YouTube |date=29 July 2007 |access-date=11 November 2012}}{{cbignore}}</ref>

The shots in the trailer were edited out of sequence, making it appear as if the Queen had abruptly left the photo shoot, when in fact, the second shot showed her ''entering'' the shoot. BBC 1 Controller [[Peter Fincham]] told journalists at the launch that it showed the monarch "losing it a bit and walking out in a huff".<ref>[https://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/entertainment/7030158.stm How the Queen clip drama unfolded] (BBC News) 5 October 2007</ref>

The next day, newspapers and other media sources ran headlines stating that the Queen had stormed out during the session. On 12 July, the BBC released a formal apology<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.bbc.co.uk/pressoffice/pressreleases/stories/2007/07_july/12/apology.shtml |title=BBC statement: Trailer for A Year With The Queen |publisher=BBC |access-date=11 November 2012}}</ref> to both the Queen and Leibovitz. On 16 July, RDF Media admitted it was "guilty of a serious error of judgement"; Fincham and RDF Media chief creative officer [[Stephen Lambert (media executive)|Stephen Lambert]] both resigned.<ref>[https://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/7029940.stm BBC One boss quits over Queen row] (BBC News) 5 October 2007</ref>

In October 2007, the BBC released the report of its investigation into the incident. The investigation concluded that nobody at the BBC "consciously set out to defame or misrepresent the Queen" and that there was never a possibility "that the misleading sequence could have been included in the finished documentary to be broadcast by the BBC" but that nonetheless "the incident reveal[ed] misjudgements, poor practice and ineffective systems as well, of course, as the usual helping of bad luck that often accompanies such sorry affairs."<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.bbc.co.uk/pressoffice/pressreleases/stories/2007/10_october/05/investigation.pdf|title=Investigation into 'A Year with the Queen'|work=BBC News|date=October 2007}}</ref>

===September 2007: The ''Blue Peter'' cat===
When the children's programme ''Blue Peter'' acquired a pet cat in January 2007, it held an internet vote to choose a name for the animal. In September of that year, it was revealed that viewers had selected the name [[Cookie]], but producers changed the result to [[Socks (Blue Peter cat)|Socks]] instead, leading to accusations of breach of audience trust. An apology to viewers was subsequently made on the programme.<ref>{{cite news
|url=https://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/entertainment/7005053.stm
|title=BBC admits new breaches of trust
|date=24 September 2007
|work=BBC News
 | access-date=1 January 2010}}</ref>

===2008: ''The Russell Brand Show'' prank telephone calls row===
{{Main|The Russell Brand Show prank calls}}
In a show recorded on 16 October 2008 and broadcast two days later, [[Russell Brand]] made several phone calls – along with guest [[Jonathan Ross]] – to the home of actor [[Andrew Sachs]], claiming that Brand had sexual relations with his granddaughter [[Georgina Baillie]], along with further apparently lewd suggestions. Later coverage in ''[[The Mail on Sunday]]'' newspaper led to number of complaints, and ultimately Ross left the corporation.

===2009: Refusal to broadcast Gaza DEC Appeal===
On 22 January 2009, the BBC declined a request from the [[Disasters Emergency Committee]]<ref name = DEC>{{cite web|url=http://www.dec.org.uk|title=DEC}}</ref> (DEC) to screen an aid appeal intended to raise money to aid the relief effort following then [[Gaza War (2008–2009)|recent hostilities]] in the [[Gaza Strip]]. Explanations cited by [[Mark Thompson (media executive)|Mark Thompson]], the BBC's then Director General raised doubts about the possibility of delivering aid in a volatile situation and highlighted the need to avoid any risk of compromising public confidence in the BBC's impartiality in the context of an ongoing news story.<ref>{{Cite news|url=https://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/7846150.stm|title=BBC defends Gaza appeal decision|year=2009|access-date=9 October 2017}}</ref>

Because of a lack of consensus among UK broadcasters, with [[British Sky Broadcasting]] announcing it would follow the BBC's view, TV channels in the UK initially decided not to broadcast the appeal.<ref>{{cite news|url=https://www.theguardian.com/media/2009/jan/26/bbc-gaza-appeal-row-timeline|title=BBC Gaza appeal row: timeline |work=The Guardian |location=London |date=26 January 2009 |access-date=26 April 2010}}</ref> A public demonstration occurred outside Broadcasting House on 24 January with former [[cabinet minister]] [[Tony Benn]] attacking the decision in an interview on [[BBC News 24]] during which he read out the appeal address, and alleging that the Israeli government was preventing the appeal from being broadcast.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E21MdXe3BOQ |archive-url=https://ghostarchive.org/varchive/youtube/20211212/E21MdXe3BOQ| archive-date=12 December 2021 |url-status=live|title=Tony Benn to BBC 'If you won't broadcast the Gaza appeal then I will myself'|date=24 January 2009 |via=[[YouTube]]}}{{cbignore}}</ref>

''The Guardian'' reported that the BBC faced a revolt from its journalists over the issue, and that they had been threatened with dismissal if they spoke out.<ref>{{cite news|url=https://www.theguardian.com/media/2009/jan/26/bbc-staff-protest-over-gaza-aid-appeal|title=BBC staff protest over decision not to show Gaza aid appeal|last=Holmwood|first=Leigh|date=26 January 2009|work=The Guardian|access-date=26 April 2010|location=London}}</ref> In an editorial, the paper described the refusal to broadcast the appeal as 'taking a partisan stance' and an [https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2009/jan/27/bbc-gaza error of judgement].

Four days after the BBC refusal, [[ITV (TV network)|ITV]], [[Channel 4]] and [[5 (British TV channel)|Five]] broadcast the appeal intact on 26 January. The BBC also broadcast substantial extracts from the appeal in its TV news programmes.

The BBC's decision came in for criticism across the political spectrum including from senior politicians such as [[Nick Clegg]], [[Douglas Alexander]] and [[Hazel Blears]] and public figures like the Archbishops of York<ref>{{cite news|url=https://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/7849554.stm|title=Reaction in BBC Gaza appeal row |date=26 January 2009 |access-date=1 January 2010 |work=BBC News}}</ref> and Canterbury,<ref>{{Cite news|url=https://www.theguardian.com/media/2009/jan/25/bbc-gaza-charity-appeal|title=Archbishop of Canterbury joins criticism of BBC refusal to air Gaza plea|last1=Davies|first1=Caroline|date=25 January 2009|work=The Guardian|access-date=9 October 2017|last2=Thorpe|first2=Vanessa|issn=0261-3077|last3=Hinsliff|first3=Gaby}}</ref> although it was supported by other commentators such as [[Dominic Lawson]].<ref>{{Cite news|url=https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/commentators/dominic-lawson/dominic-lawson-when-charities-turn-political-the-bbc-is-right-to-tread-warily-1516810.html|title=Dominic Lawson: When charities turn political, the BBC is right to|date=27 January 2009|work=The Independent|access-date=10 October 2017}}</ref>

On 25 January 2009, then Secretary of State for International Development [[Douglas Alexander]] supported the appeal telling Sky News: "My appeal is a much more straight forward one. People are suffering right now, many hundreds of thousands of people are without the basic necessities of life. That for me is a very straight forward case and I sincerely hope that the British people respond with characteristic generosity."<ref>{{cite news |last1=Prince |first1=Rosa |title=BBC criticised over Gaza appeal by Douglas Alexander, the Development Secretary |url=https://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/tvandradio/4345298/BBC-criticised-over-Gaza-appeal-by-Douglas-Alexander-the-Development-Secretary.html |access-date=4 April 2020 |work=The Telegraph |date=26 January 2009}}</ref>

MP [[Richard Burden]] put forward an [[early day motion]] calling on the BBC to screen the appeal which received the support of 112 MPs.<ref>{{cite news|url=https://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/7850407.stm|title=MPs call on BBC to air Gaza film |date=26 January 2009 |access-date=1 January 2010 |work=BBC News}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://richardburden.com/2009/01/dec-gaza-crisis-appeal/|title=DEC Gaza Crisis Appeal {{!}} Richard Burden|website=richardburden.com|date=26 January 2009 |access-date=10 October 2017}}</ref> Meanwhile, another Labour MP, [[Gerald Kaufman]], complained about "nasty pressure" on the BBC from Israeli lobbyists. However, [[Mark Thompson (media executive)|Mark Thompson]], the [[Director-General of the BBC]], denied that the decision was due to Israeli pressure.<ref>{{cite news|url=https://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/7850407.stm|title=BBC chief stands firm over Gaza |date=26 January 2009 |access-date=1 January 2010 |work=BBC News}}</ref> Complaints to the BBC about the decision were directed to Mark Thompson's blog.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/theeditors/2009/01/bbc_and_the_gaza_appeal.html|title=BBC and the Gaza appeal |author=Mark Thompson |date=24 January 2009}}</ref> BBC's ''[[Newsnight]]'' programme reported that the BBC had received over 15,000 complaints as well as 200 letters of support.<ref>{{cite episode|url=https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b00hcgxr|series=[[Newsnight]] |title=26/10/09 |network=BBC |station=[[BBC Two]] |date=26 January 2009}}</ref>

After the appeal was broadcast on Channel 4 on 26 January 2009, [[Niaz Alam]] resigned as an external member of the [https://web.archive.org/web/20140825075350/http://www.bbc.co.uk/charityappeals/about/appeals-advisory-committee BBC's Appeals Advisory Committee] in protest<ref>{{Cite news|url=https://www.thirdsector.co.uk/bbc-advisory-panel-member-resigns-protest-gaza-appeal/communications/article/879730|title=BBC Advisory Panel member resigns protest gaza appeal|work=Third Sector}}</ref> at the BBC's explanation of its refusal to broadcast the appeal, after news coverage gave the impression the whole of this committee had been party to the decision.

A version of his resignation letter,<ref>{{cite web|url=https://muradqureshi.com/resignation-from-bbc-appeals-advisory-committee-over-gaza-appeal/#comments|title=RESIGNATION FROM BBC APPEALS ADVISORY COMMITTEE OVER GAZA APPEAL {{!}} Murad Qureshi|website=muradqureshi.com|date=27 January 2009|access-date=9 October 2017}}</ref> was published in ''[[Private Eye]]'',<ref>{{cite web|url=http://tradingaswdr.blogspot.co.uk/2009/02/eye-eye.html|title=Eye eye|website=tradingaswdr.blogspot.co.uk|date=18 February 2009|access-date=9 October 2017}}</ref> defending the impartiality of the [[Disasters Emergency Committee]]'s recommendation and criticising the BBC's refusal to broadcast the appeal. The letter also disputed the logic of the justification to block the appeal on grounds of impartiality by pointing out that 'the ultimate logic of a policy of avoiding appeals arising out of politically controversial conflicts would be for the BBC to ignore major humanitarian crises.'

Journalist and broadcaster [[Peter Oborne]] wrote and presented an edition of Channel 4's ''[[Dispatches (TV programme)|Dispatches]]'' titled "Inside Britain's Israel Lobby, " in which this controversy was featured as one small part towards the end, when he discussed the BBC's refusal to broadcast the 2009 DEC Gaza appeal with Niaz Alam.

The BBC Trust reported in its 'Decision of the BBC Trust' document on the appeal that, 'the BBC Executive had received about 40,000 complaints about the Director General's decision'.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.bbc.co.uk/bbctrust/our_work/complaints_and_appeals/dec_gaza/appeal_findings.html|title=Decision of the BBC Trust: Determination of an appeal against the decision of the Director General of the BBC not to broadcast the DEC Gaza Crisis Appeal|date=February 2009|access-date=13 April 2010}}</ref> The BBC's chief operating officer, [[Caroline Thomson]], affirmed the need to broadcast "without affecting and impinging on the audience's perception of our impartiality" and that in this case, it was a "real issue."<ref>{{cite news|title=Protest over BBC Gaza appeal veto|url=https://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/7848614.stm|work=BBC News|access-date=24 January 2009|date=24 January 2009|archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20090129080741/http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7848614.stm|archive-date=29 January 2009 |url-status=live}}</ref>

The 2009 Gaza appeal is the only occasion on which the BBC is known to have refused an appeal broadcast request from the DEC.

It is reported the 2009 DEC Gaza appeal screened only by Channel 4 and ITV raised £8.3m.<ref>{{Cite news|url=https://www.dec.org.uk/appeal/appeals-archive|title=Appeals Archive|date=26 November 2014|work=Disasters Emergency Committee|access-date=9 October 2017}}</ref> In August 2014, the BBC broadcast a new DEC aid appeal for people in Gaza,<ref>{{Cite news|url=https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-28686516|title=BBC to broadcast DEC Gaza appeal|date=7 August 2014|work=BBC News|access-date=9 October 2017}}</ref> without similar controversy, which raised £16m over two years.<ref>{{Cite news|url=https://www.dec.org.uk/appeal/gaza-crisis-appeal|title=Gaza Crisis Appeal|date=8 August 2014|work=Disasters Emergency Committee|access-date=9 October 2017}}</ref>

===2009: BNP ''Question Time'' appearance===
{{Main|Question Time British National Party controversy}}
Following the improved performance of the [[British National Party]] in the 2009 European elections, the BBC controversially changed its stance on the appearance of the BNP on the flagship current affairs talk show, ''[[Question Time (TV programme)|Question Time]]'', and invited party leader [[Nick Griffin]] to appear on its edition of 22 October 2009. The BBC was also obliged to transmit [[party political broadcast]]s by the BNP.

===2008–2013: Digital Media Initiative <span class="anchor" id="dmi"></span><!-- please retain anchor - used by redirect page -->===
{{Main|Digital Media Initiative}}

In 2008, the BBC launched the Digital Media Initiative (DMI), a technology programme intended to streamline broadcast operations by moving to a fully digital, [[tapeless]] production workflow at a cost of £81.7 million. It was forecast to deliver cost savings to the BBC of around £18 million. DMI was contracted out to the technology services provider [[Atos Information Technology Incorporated|Siemens]] with consulting by [[Deloitte]].

Costs of the project rose after a number of technical problems and delays, and in 2009 the BBC terminated the contract with Siemens.<ref name="broadcast-dmi">{{cite news|last=Rushton|first=Katherine|title=BBC ditches Siemens from £80m DMI scheme|url=http://www.broadcastnow.co.uk/news/broadcasters/bbc-ditches-siemens-from-80m-dmi-scheme/5008953.article|access-date=15 February 2012|newspaper=Broadcast|date=10 December 2009}}</ref> BBC losses were estimated to be £38.2m,<ref name="ITProPortal-dmi">{{cite web|title=BBC Loses £38 Million in Failed Digital Media Initiative|url=http://www.itproportal.com/2011/04/07/bbc-loses-38-million-failed-digital-media-initiative/|work=ITProPortal|date=7 April 2011|access-date=15 February 2012|archive-date=18 December 2022|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20221218100055/https://www.itproportal.com/2011/04/07/bbc-loses-38-million-failed-digital-media-initiative/|url-status=dead}}</ref> partially offset by a £27.5m settlement paid by Siemens, leaving a loss of £10.7m to the BBC. The BBC was criticised by the UK [[National Audit Office (United Kingdom)|National Audit Office]] in 2011 for its handling of the project.<ref name="guardian-dmi">{{cite news|last=Plunkett|first=John|title=BBC IT project criticised by audit office|url=https://www.theguardian.com/media/2011/feb/01/bbc-it-audit-office|access-date=15 February 2012|newspaper=The Guardian|date=1 February 2011|location=London}}</ref>

In 2009, the BBC brought the DMI project in-house and started work on a digital system to be known as ''Fabric''.<ref name="bbc-dmi">{{cite web|title=Digital Media Initiative|url=https://www.bbc.co.uk/careers/divisions/digital-media-initiative|archive-url=https://archive.today/20120310041000/http://www.bbc.co.uk/careers/divisions/digital-media-initiative|url-status=dead|archive-date=10 March 2012|publisher=BBC|access-date=15 February 2012}}</ref> [[Tony Hall, Baron Hall of Birkenhead|Lord Hall]], the BBC's Director General, announced in late May 2013 that the project was to be abandoned after costs reached £98 million.<ref>[https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-22651126 "BBC abandons £100m digital project"], BBC News, 24 May 2013</ref><ref>Tara Conlan [https://www.theguardian.com/media/2013/may/24/bbc-technology-project-digital-media-initiative "BBC axes £98m technology project to avoid 'throwing good money after bad'"], ''The Guardian'', 24 May 2013</ref>

===2009–2012: Denis Avey Claims===
On 29 November 2009, BBC News Channel broadcast claims by [[Denis Avey]] that he smuggled himself into [[Monowitz]] concentration camp in 1944. These claims were presented as fact on the BBC website<ref>{{cite news| url=https://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/8382457.stm | work=BBC News | title=The man who smuggled himself into Auschwitz | date=29 November 2009}}</ref> and became the subject of the best-selling book ''[[The Man Who Broke into Auschwitz]]'', co-authored by Avey and BBC journalist Rob Broomby. Avey's claims generated considerable controversy, and were questioned in a number of newspapers.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.thesundaytimes.co.uk/sto/news/uk_news/People/article820973.ece|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130622205132/http://www.thesundaytimes.co.uk/sto/news/uk_news/People/article820973.ece|url-status=dead|archive-date=22 June 2013|title=Hero of Holocaust changed key elements of his story|work=The Sunday Times}}</ref> The BBC came under criticism for having broadcast these and for promoting the book.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.newstatesman.com/blogs/guy-walters/2011/11/avey-book-holocaust-auschwitz|title=The curious case of the 'break into Auschwitz'|work=New Statesman|date=8 June 2021}}</ref><ref>{{cite news|url=https://www.faz.net/aktuell/feuilleton/buecher/2.1719/umstrittenes-buch-schoa-zum-anfassen-1640067.html|title=Umstrittenes Buch: Schoa zum Anfassen|author=Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung GmbH|date=19 May 2011|work=Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung}}</ref> The BBC subsequently acknowledged the controversy in a subsequent programme.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p00qzn16|title=BBC One – Witness to Auschwitz, Witness to Auschwitz|publisher=BBC|date=10 April 2012 }}</ref>

===2009–2014: Women in panel shows===
In 2009, the actress and comedian [[Victoria Wood]] stated that BBC [[panel show]]s were too male-dominated, and involved "a lot of men topping each other".<ref>{{cite web|last=Khan |first=Urmee |url=https://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/culturenews/5478241/TV-panel-shows-are-too-male-dominated-claims-Victoria-Wood.html |title=TV panel shows are too 'male dominated', claims Victoria Wood |work=The Daily Telegraph |date=9 June 2009 |access-date=15 January 2018}}</ref>

In February 2014, the television executive [[Danny Cohen (television executive)|Danny Cohen]] said that there would no longer be any all male comedy panel shows on the BBC and all shows must contain a woman. The journalist [[Caitlin Moran]] referred to [[tokenism]] already existing on such shows.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-26107011 |title=BBC TV boss: No all-male panel shows |publisher=BBC |date=9 February 2014 |access-date=15 January 2018 }}</ref> [[Dara Ó Briain]], host of BBC Two panel show ''[[Mock the Week]]'', also referred to tokenism and "token woman" speaking against this idea.<ref>{{cite web|author=Account |url=http://www.contactmusic.com/article/dara-o-briain-blasts-bbc-over-ban-of-all-male-comedy-panels_4083858 |title=Dara O'Briain Blasts BBC Over Ban Of All-Male Comedy Panels |publisher=Contactmusic.com |date=25 February 2014 |access-date=15 January 2018}}</ref> Comedian [[Milton Jones]] called it "counterproductive".<ref>{{cite web|last=Dowell |first=Ben |url=http://www.radiotimes.com/news/2014-06-13/bbcs-female-quota-for-comedy-panel-shows-is-counterproductive-says-mock-the-weeks-milton-jones |title=BBC's female quota for comedy panel shows is "counterproductive" says Mock the Week's Milton Jones |work=Radio Times |date=13 June 2014 |access-date=15 January 2018}}</ref>

Journalist [[Deborah Orr]], although she also considered it "tokenistic", wrote in favour of the plan: "The issue of gender representation on panel games is comparatively trivial. But the fact is this: if comparatively trivial contemporary manifestations of long-standing disadvantage cannot be seen for what they are, and dealt with, but instead become bemired in trenchant opposition, what hope is there in tackling the vast, brutal and comprehensive ones."<ref>Deborah Orr [https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/feb/28/lack-of-women-panel-shows-matters "A lack of women on TV panel shows may not be the worst injustice, but it matters"], ''The Guardian'', 28 February 2014</ref>

==2010–2019==
===2010: Weapons claims offend Bob Geldof, Ethiopia and Africa===
In March 2010 [[Bob Geldof]] confronted [[Andrew Marr]] on a BBC report claiming the Ethiopian government used money raised for the famine to pay for weapons. Geldof and the [[Band Aid Trust]] reported the BBC to [[Ofcom]] over the incident.<ref>{{cite news|last1=Reid|first1=Julia|url=http://news.sky.com/skynews/Home/UK-News/Sir-Bob-Geldof-To-Report-BBC-To-Ofcom-Over-Ethiopia-Weapons-Claims/Article/201003115568290?f=rss|title=Geldof Slams BBC Over Ethiopia Weapons Claims|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20100308135922/http://news.sky.com/skynews/Home/UK-News/Sir-Bob-Geldof-To-Report-BBC-To-Ofcom-Over-Ethiopia-Weapons-Claims/Article/201003115568290?f=rss |archive-date=8 March 2010|publisher=Sky News|date=6 March 2010}}</ref> Development agency [[Christian Aid]] announced it too would make a complaint to the BBC Trust.<ref>[https://archive.today/20120731043045/http://www.france24.com/en/20100307-geldof-attacks-bbc-report-ethiopia-aid Geldof attacks BBC report on Ethiopia aid]. France24. 7 March 2010.</ref> The Ethiopian ambassador to the UK [[Berhanu Kebede]] called it a "disgrace" and a "ridiculous report" and said the BBC had "destroyed its credibility in Africa" by making such claims.<ref>{{cite news|author=McVeigh, Tracy|url=https://www.theguardian.com/society/2010/mar/14/ethiopia-envoy-bob-geldof-bbc|title=Ethiopian envoy joins battle between Bob Geldof and BBC World Service|work=The Observer|date=14 March 2010}}</ref> Geldof said it would be a "tragedy" if British people refused to donate money due to the BBC claims.<ref>{{cite news|author=Philp, Catherine|url=http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/africa/article7048914.ece|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20100525072048/http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/africa/article7048914.ece|url-status=dead|archive-date=25 May 2010|title= Bob Geldof rages at BBC over claim Live Aid millions were used to buy arms|work=[[The Times]]|date=4 March 2010}}</ref>

The BBC initially announced that it was standing by its report and claimed to have evidence to back up its stance.<ref>[https://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/8554048.stm Bob Geldof demands proof of BBC Ethiopia aid report]. BBC News. 7 March 2010.</ref> The BBC was forced to broadcast a series of apologies in November 2010 after realising that it did not have enough evidence that any money was spent on weapons, basing much of the claims on a CIA report it had failed to question. It also apologised to Geldof for claiming that he had refused to respond to its fabricated story, with Geldof saying that much damage had been caused by the BBC to charity campaigns.{{citation needed|date=April 2020}} Mr. Geldof also said "appalling damage" had been caused to the Band Aid Trust by the BBC.<ref>[http://www.ethiopian-news.com/bbc-apologises-to-bob-geldof-over-band-aid-claims/ BBC apologises to Bob Geldof over Band Aid claims] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20101114024901/http://www.ethiopian-news.com/bbc-apologises-to-bob-geldof-over-band-aid-claims/ |date=14 November 2010 }}. Ethiopian News. 4 November 2010.</ref>

===2007–2011: Accusations of ageism and sexism===
The BBC was accused of ageism and sexism when news presenter [[Moira Stuart]] (55) – the first black female television newsreader – was sacked in April 2007 after more than two decades of presenting, despite many male presenters in similar situations being allowed to continue in their jobs.<ref>
{{cite news
 |url=https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/1547538/BBC-accused-of-ageism-and-sexism-after-Stuart-is-axed.html
 |title=BBC accused of ageism and sexism after Stuart is axed
 |last=Alleyne
 |first=Richard
 |date=11 January 2011
|work=The Telegraph
 |access-date=11 January 2011
|location=London
}}</ref>
In November 2008, four female ''[[Countryfile]]'' presenters ([[Michaela Strachan]], [[Charlotte Smith (broadcaster)|Charlotte Smith]], [[Miriam O'Reilly]] and [[Juliet Morris]]), all in their 40s and 50s, were dismissed from the show.<ref>
{{cite news
 |url=https://www.theguardian.com/media/2008/nov/28/countryfile-bbc
 |title=Countryfile peak-time move sparks ageism row
 |last=Holmwood
 |first=Leigh
 |date=28 November 2008
|work=The Guardian
 |access-date=11 January 2011
|location=London
}}</ref>

The issue returned in July 2009, when former theatre choreographer [[Arlene Phillips]] (66) was replaced on the ''[[Strictly Come Dancing]]'' panel by [[Alesha Dixon]], a pop-star half her age.<ref name="dix">
{{cite news
 |url=https://www.theguardian.com/media/2009/jul/09/arlene-phillips-strictly-come-dancing-bbc
 |title=BBC denies ageism as Arlene Phillips shifted off Strictly Come Dancing
 |last=Holmwood
 |first=Leigh
 |date=9 July 2009
|work=The Guardian
 |access-date=11 January 2011
|location=London
}}</ref> The male presenters on the show were [[Len Goodman]] (65), [[Bruno Tonioli]] (53), [[Craig Revel Horwood]] (44), and [[Bruce Forsyth]] (81).<ref name="dix" />

Former ''Countryfile'' presenter Miriam O'Reilly claimed she was "warned about wrinkles",<ref>
{{cite news
 |url=https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-11696591
 |title=Countryfile presenter suing BBC 'warned about wrinkles'
 |date=4 November 2010
|work=BBC News
 |access-date=11 January 2011
| archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20110113070445/http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-11696591| archive-date= 13 January 2011 | url-status= live}}</ref> and won an employment tribunal against the corporation on the grounds of ageism and victimisation – but not sexism.<ref>
{{cite news
 |url=https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-12161045
 |title=Miriam O'Reilly wins Countryfile ageism claim
 |date=11 January 2011
|work=BBC News
 |access-date=11 January 2011
| archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20110113044703/http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-12161045| archive-date= 13 January 2011 | url-status= live}}</ref> With other older women also dropped by the BBC, [[Joan Bakewell]] claimed the BBC's policy was "damaging the position of older women in society", whilst former Liberal Democrat leader [[Menzies Campbell]] said that the BBC was obsessed with youth culture and was shallow thinking.<ref>
{{cite news
 |url=https://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/mediatechnologyandtelecoms/media/5864279/BBCs-hostility-to-older-women-is-damaging-society-says-Joan-Bakewell.html
 |title=BBC's hostility to older women is damaging society, says Joan Bakewell
 |last=Moore
 |first=Matthew
 |date=19 July 2009
|work=The Telegraph
 |access-date=11 January 2011
|location=London
}}</ref>

===2010–2011: ''QI'' and Tsutomu Yamaguchi===
In December 2010, the BBC broadcast an episode of its TV quiz show ''[[QI]]'' in which panellists made jokes during a discussion about [[Tsutomu Yamaguchi]], who survived both [[atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki]] in August 1945.<ref name="BBC QI Tsutomu Yamaguchi"/> Yamaguchi had died only earlier that year.<ref name="BBC QI Tsutomu Yamaguchi"/> The [[Embassy of Japan, London|Japanese embassy in London]] wrote a letter of complaint to the BBC about the content of its quiz show after being alerted to the offensive content when viewers in Japan contacted diplomatic staff.<ref name="BBC QI Tsutomu Yamaguchi"/> Yamaguchi's daughter also made known how upset she was as a result of the comments broadcast on the BBC.<ref>[http://www.smh.com.au/entertainment/tv-and-radio/stephen-frys-japan-visit-cancelled-over-qi-row-20110204-1afu0.html "Stephen Fry's Japan visit cancelled over QI row"]. ''The Sydney Morning Herald''. 4 February 2011.</ref> She said that Britain, as a nuclear power, had no right to "look down" on her father.<ref>McCurry, Justin. [https://www.theguardian.com/media/2011/feb/03/stephen-fry-shelves-japan-filming "Stephen Fry shelves filming in Japan after atomic bomb jokes outcry"]. ''The Guardian''. 3 February 2011.</ref>

In January 2011, the BBC issued an apology for "any offence caused" to Japan by the incident, recognising "the sensitivity of the subject matter for Japanese viewers".<ref name="BBC QI Tsutomu Yamaguchi">{{cite web |url=https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-12260577 |title=BBC apologises for Japanese atomic bomb jokes on QI |work=BBC News |date=22 January 2011}}</ref> In February 2011, the BBC blamed a "strength of feeling" in Japan following its atomic bomb joke broadcast for the cancellation of the filming of part of its ''[[Planet Word]]'' documentary in Japan.<ref>[https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-12361873 "Stephen Fry Japan trip scrapped after A-bomb joke"]. BBC News. 3 February 2011.</ref> The documentary was due to be presented by [[Stephen Fry]], the host of ''QI''.<ref>[http://mdn.mainichi.jp/mdnnews/news/20110204p2g00m0dm109000c.html "BBC QI show host cancels Japan trip over A-bomb survivor joke"] {{webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110206033926/http://mdn.mainichi.jp/mdnnews/news/20110204p2g00m0dm109000c.html |date=6 February 2011 }}. ''Mainichi Shimbun''. 4 February 2011.</ref>

===2011: ''Top Gear'' comments on Mexico===
{{See also|Top Gear controversies}}
On 30 January 2011, the BBC broadcast an episode of its motoring TV show ''[[Top Gear (2002 TV series)|Top Gear]]'' during which presenters referred to Mexicans as both "lazy" and "feckless" and Mexican food as "refried sick".<ref name="BBC Top Gear Mexico"/> The broadcast caused many complaints in Mexico, including in newspapers and websites, while a motion of censure was considered in the Mexican senate and the BBC Spanish-language website [[BBC Mundo]] received protests.<ref name="BBC Top Gear Mexico"/> [[Jeremy Clarkson]], one of the presenters, expressed doubt that there would be any complaints against them as, he joked, the Mexican ambassador would be asleep.<ref name="BBC Top Gear Mexico"/>

British MPs described the comments as "ignorant, derogatory and racist" and called on the BBC to say it was sorry.<ref name="BBC Top Gear Mexico"/> Mexico's ambassador in London also requested that the BBC say it was sorry for the "offensive, xenophobic and humiliating" comments.<ref name="BBC Top Gear Mexico"/><ref>Robinson, James. [https://www.theguardian.com/media/2011/feb/01/top-gear-mexican-ambassador "Top Gear angers Mexican ambassador"]. ''The Guardian''. 1 February 2011.</ref> 

The BBC then offered an apology, though it claimed there was no "vindictiveness" in the remarks and that they were just part of the stereotype-based comedy the organisation espoused, such as when it "make[s] jokes about the Italians being disorganised and over dramatic, the French being arrogant and the Germans being over-organised".<ref name="BBC Top Gear Mexico">[https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-latin-america-12361790 "BBC offers apology for Top Gear comments on Mexico"]. BBC News. 4 February 2011.</ref><ref>[http://www.torontosun.com/entertainment/tv/2011/02/04/17150176-wenn-story.html "BBC sorry for Mexican car jokes"]. ''Toronto Sun''. 4 February 2011.</ref> [[Trevor Phillips]], head of the [[Equality and Human Rights Commission]], told ''[[The Sunday Times]]'' that he was "not going to get hot under the collar about schoolboy provocation which frankly is organised so that we can get into a ruck and sell more DVDs for Jeremy Clarkson – Jeremy is rich enough".<ref>{{cite news| url=https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-12376300 |work=BBC News | location=London | title='Trevor Phillips 'sickened' by Commons 'mockery' of MP | date=6 February 2011 | access-date=6 February 2011| archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20110207050521/http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-12376300| archive-date= 7 February 2011 | url-status= live}}</ref>

===Fake child labour footage in Bangalore===
The BBC's then nearly 60-year-old flagship weekly current affairs programme ''[[Panorama (British TV programme)|Panorama]]'' had aired a documentary claiming that Bangalore-based suppliers of [[Primark]], a hugely successful retailer with 220 stores across Europe, were using child labour in their production in 2008. The claim has been found to be untrue and the BBC apologised to Primark admitting its mistake. Responding to Primark's protest, the BBC conceded in a 49-page report that footage of three boys engaged in completing garments for Primark was "more likely than not" to have been "not genuine" after a three-year internal inquiry.<ref>[https://web.archive.org/web/20111129103412/http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/2011-06-18/india/29674068_1_footage-of-three-boys-child-labour-primark BBC sorry to Bangalore-based supplier for fake child labour footage], Ashis Ray, TNN, 18 June 2011, 03.56&nbsp;am IST, LONDON</ref>

===UEFA Euro 2012 in Poland and Ukraine===
{{See also|Concerns and controversies related to UEFA Euro 2012#Panorama documentary and reaction}}
During the [[UEFA Euro 2012]] football tournament in Poland and Ukraine, the [[BBC]] [[Current affairs (news format)|current affairs]] programme ''[[Panorama (British TV programme)|Panorama]]'' aired ''Euro 2012: Stadiums of Hate'', which discussed racism in the sport. It included recent footage of supporters chanting various xenophobic slogans and displays of [[White nationalism#White power|white power]] symbols and banners in Poland, as well as Nazi salutes and the beating of a few South Asians in Ukraine.<ref name="campbell">{{cite news | url=https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-18192375 | title=Sol Campbell warns fans to stay away from Euro 2012 |work=BBC News | date=28 May 2012 | access-date=29 May 2012}}</ref> The documentary was widely commented in the British press, but later criticised for being one-sided, sensationalist and unethical. The critics included other British media outlets, Polish anti-racism campaigners and black and Jewish community leaders in Poland. Polish and Ukrainian politicians and journalists, British fans visiting Poland and Ukraine and [[Gary Lineker]] also voiced similar concerns about the broadcast.<ref name="economist.com">{{cite news| url=https://www.economist.com/blogs/easternapproaches/2012/06/ugly-spectre | newspaper=The Economist | title=Euro 2012 is overshadowed by accusations of racism and anti-Semitism | date=6 June 2012}}</ref><ref>{{cite news| url=https://www.economist.com/blogs/easternapproaches/2012/06/poland-and-bbc | newspaper=The Economist | title=Stitch up unstitched—updated (again) | date=13 June 2012}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.hindustantimes.com/sports-news/Football/Unfair-say-organisers/Article1-863192.aspx |title='Unfair' say organisers |work=Hindustan Times |date=29 May 2012 |access-date=14 June 2012 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20121201153444/http://www.hindustantimes.com/sports-news/Football/Unfair-say-organisers/Article1-863192.aspx |archive-date=1 December 2012 }}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.mirror.co.uk/sport/football/news/matt-laws-euro-2012-diary-946599|title=Matt Law's Euro 2012 diary: My highs and lows of the tournament in Poland and Ukraine|author=Matt Law|work=mirror|date=30 June 2012}}</ref>

The executive director of the Jewish Community Centre of [[Kraków]], [[Jonathan Ornstein]], a Jewish source used in the film said: "I am furious at the way the BBC has exploited me as a source. The organization used me and others to manipulate the serious subject of anti-Semitism for its own sensationalist agenda... the BBC knowingly cheated its own audience – the British people – by concocting a false horror story about Poland. In doing so, the BBC has spread fear, ignorance, prejudice and hatred. I am profoundly disturbed by this unethical form of journalism."<ref name="economist.com"/>

''[[The Guardian]]'' reported: "Other sources have come forward to say that an interview with a Jewish Israeli player was also cut from the programme because he failed to confirm Panorama's "anti-semitism" thesis. The BBC interviewed midfielder [[Aviram Baruchyan|Aviram Baruchian]], who plays for the Polish team [[Polonia Warsaw]]. One source who was present said the Panorama journalists had complained afterwards that the interview was "useless". Panorama strongly denies this.<ref>{{cite news| url=https://www.theguardian.com/world/2012/jun/13/ukraine-bbc-euro-2012-panorama?INTCMP=SRCH | location=London | work=The Guardian | first1=Luke | last1=Harding | first2=Kamil | last2=Tchorek | title=Ukraine attacks BBC Panorama documentary as 'provocation' | date=13 June 2012}}</ref>

Despite the BBC warning, Poland and Ukraine fans were not exhibiting racist attitudes. By the end of the tournament however, four other nations were fined by UEFA for the racist activities of their fans: Germany, Spain, [[Croatia]] and Russia.<ref>{{cite news|last=Gorchinskaya|first=Katya|title=Small business bearing the brunt of corruption|url=http://www.kyivpost.com/opinion/op-ed/racism-and-euro-2012.html#.T_Ni8xdo1p4|newspaper=Kyiv Post|date=12 June 1997}}</ref>

===June 2012: Diamond Jubilee coverage===
The BBC's live television coverage of the [[Thames Diamond Jubilee Pageant|Queen's Diamond Jubilee River Thames Pageant]] on 3 June 2012 attracted some criticism in the media, and the corporation reportedly received over 4500 complaints from members of the public about the broadcast.<ref name="guardian-8-jun">{{cite news|last=Dowell|first=Ben|title=BBC's diamond jubilee coverage draws 4,500 complaints|url=https://www.theguardian.com/media/2012/jun/08/bbc-diamond-jubilee-coverage-complaints|access-date=11 June 2012|newspaper=The Guardian|date=8 June 2012|location=London}}</ref> Criticism centred on the "informal" style of presentation which was perceived by some commentators to be too [[Low culture|lowbrow]] for a royal occasion. Some reviewers thought that the BBC presenters had concentrated too much on interviewing [[celebrities]] and that they were insufficiently prepared to add depth to the TV commentary.<ref>{{cite web|last=Marsh|first=Kevin|title=Pageant Lament|url=http://storycurve.blogspot.co.uk/|work="Story Curve" blog|access-date=11 June 2012}}</ref>

The actor and writer [[Stephen Fry]] was of the opinion that the coverage was "mind-numbingly tedious",<ref name="huffington-30-june">{{cite news|title=Stephen Fry: BBC Jubilee Coverage Mind-Numbingly Tedious|url=http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2012/06/03/stephen-fry-bbc-jubilee-coverage-boring_n_1566326.html|access-date=11 June 2012|newspaper=HuffPost|date=3 June 2012}}</ref> and BBC radio presenter [[Sue MacGregor]] expressed disappointment that the coverage had failed to provide sufficient historical context to viewers.<ref>{{cite news|title=Sue MacGregor attacks 'disgraceful' BBC over Diamond Jubilee coverage|url=https://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/tvandradio/9329912/Sue-MacGregor-attacks-disgraceful-BBC-over-Diamond-Jubilee-coverage.html|access-date=14 June 2012|newspaper=The Daily Telegraph|location=London|first=Tim|last=Walker|date=14 June 2012}}</ref> [[Poet Laureate of the United Kingdom|Poet Laureate]] [[Carol Ann Duffy]]<ref name="guardian-composers">{{cite news|last=Dowell|first=Ben|title=Jubilee pageant composers condemn BBC coverage|url=https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2012/jun/06/jubilee-pageant-composers-bbc-coverage|access-date=11 June 2012|date=6 June 2012|location=London|work=The Guardian}}</ref> and composer [[Gavin Greenaway]]<ref>{{cite web|last=Greenaway|first=Gavin|title=Cock-up or conspiracy?|url=http://any2words.blogspot.co.uk/2012/06/cock-up-or-conspiracy.html|work=Not a Destination (blog)|date=4 June 2012|access-date=11 June 2012}}</ref> publicly criticised the lack of television coverage given to the music which had been specially commissioned for the event. BBC creative director [[Alan Yentob]] defended the BBC's coverage, citing high audience approval ratings, and [[Director-General of the BBC]] [[Mark Thompson (media executive)|Mark Thompson]] congratulated BBC staff for their work on the broadcast.<ref name="bbc-11-june">{{cite news|title=Jubilee coverage: BBC receives more than 2,000 complaints|url=https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-18337851|access-date=11 June 2012|work=BBC News|date=6 June 2012}}</ref>

===October 2012: Jimmy Savile abuse scandal===
{{Main|Jimmy Savile sexual abuse scandal}}

In early October 2012, it was found that a Newsnight investigation to allegations of [[Jimmy Savile sexual abuse scandal|sexual abuse by the late Jimmy Savile]] had been shelved shortly before it was due to be broadcast.<ref>{{cite news|last=Mason |first=Rowena |url=https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/9613014/BBCs-Jimmy-Savile-probe-to-be-led-by-Harold-Shipman-inquiry-judge.html |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20121017060855/http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/9613014/BBCs-Jimmy-Savile-probe-to-be-led-by-Harold-Shipman-inquiry-judge.html |url-status=dead |archive-date=17 October 2012 |title=BBC's Jimmy Savile probe to be led by Harold Shipman inquiry judge |work=The Daily Telegraph |access-date=11 November 2012 |location=London |date=16 October 2012}}</ref> On 11 October [[George Entwistle]], the [[Director-General of the BBC]], directed the head of BBC Scotland, Ken MacQuarrie, to commence an investigation into why this program was cancelled,<ref>{{cite news|url=https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-19918192 |title=Sir Jimmy Savile inquiry: BBC responds to staff concerns |publisher=BBC |date=12 October 2012 |access-date=11 November 2012}}</ref> He also announced an investigation into the BBC's child protection policy, and another into the prevalent culture within the department, particularly at the time of Savile's employment.<ref>{{cite news|last1=Sabbagh|first1=Dan|last2=Halliday|first2=Josh|last3=O'Carroll|first3=Lisa|url=https://www.theguardian.com/media/2012/oct/12/jimmy-savile-bbc-apology-inquiries |title=Jimmy Savile: BBC issues 'heartfelt apology' as two inquiries launched &#124; Media |work=The Guardian |access-date=11 November 2012 |location=London |date=12 October 2012}}</ref><ref>{{cite news|url=https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-19929967 |title=Jimmy Savile sex abuse claims: George Entwistle statement |publisher=BBC |date=12 October 2012 |access-date=11 November 2012}}</ref>

On 23 October 2012, Entwistle appeared before the [[Culture, Media and Sport Committee]] to answer questions following revelations that Savile had abused children on BBC property while working for the BBC. When asked by committee chairman [[John Whittingdale]] if the BBC's reputation for trust and integrity was in jeopardy, Entwistle stated that allegations of child abuse at the BBC were a "very, very grave matter".<ref>{{cite web |last=Saunders |first=Peter |url=http://news.sky.com/story/1001205/jimmy-savile-bbc-boss-is-grilled-by-mps |title=BBC Chief: Savile Scandal Has Hurt Reputation |publisher=BSkyB |date=23 October 2012 |access-date=11 November 2012 |archive-date=25 October 2012 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20121025224611/http://news.sky.com/story/1001205/jimmy-savile-bbc-boss-is-grilled-by-mps |url-status=dead }}</ref> A ''[[Panorama (British TV programme)|Panorama]]'' investigation reported on what they considered to have been a paedophile ring that might have operated for at least 20 years, and possibly as long as 40 years, and BBC World Affairs editor [[John Simpson (journalist)|John Simpson]] described it as the BBC's "biggest crisis for over 50 years".<ref>{{cite news|author=Torin Douglas |url=https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-20024904 |title=Jimmy Savile: BBC Newsnight editor steps aside over claims |publisher=BBC |date=22 October 2012 |access-date=11 November 2012}}</ref>

On 12 November, the BBC announced that its director of news [[Helen Boaden]] was "stepping aside", together with her deputy [[Stephen Mitchell (journalist)|Steve Mitchell]], prior to the outcome of an investigation into the Savile child abuse claims.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-20294283 |title=BBC news executives 'step aside' |publisher=BBC |date=12 November 2012 |access-date=15 January 2018}}</ref> Nick Pollard's report into the shelving of a ''Newsnight'' report on Savile in 2011 was published on 19 December 2012. It concluded that the decision to drop the original report was "flawed", but that it had not been done to protect programmes prepared as tributes to Savile. Pollard's report criticised George Entwistle for apparently failing to read emails warning him of Savile's "dark side",<ref>{{cite news|last=Halliday |first=Josh |url=https://www.theguardian.com/media/2012/dec/19/pollard-report-george-entwistle-jimmy-savile |title=Pollard report: George Entwistle 'did not read emails' about Jimmy Savile |work=The Guardian |date=19 December 2012 |access-date=19 December 2012 |location=London}}</ref> and stated that, after the allegations against Savile eventually became public, the BBC fell into a "level of chaos and confusion [that] was even greater than was apparent at the time".<ref name=gdn191212ps>{{cite news|last1=Sabbagh |first1=Dan |last2=Plunkett |first2=John |url=https://www.theguardian.com/media/2012/dec/19/pollard-inquiry-bbc-jimmy-savile |title=Pollard inquiry: BBC 'incapable' of dealing with Jimmy Savile affair |work=The Guardian |date=19 December 2012 |access-date=19 December 2012 |location=London}}</ref> The BBC announced that ''Newsnight'' editor [[Peter Rippon]] and deputy editor Liz Gibbons would be replaced, and that deputy director of news Steve Mitchell had resigned, but that Helen Boaden would return to her role.<ref name=gdn191212ps/>

On 21 January 2013, the BBC News website ran a story revealing that the BBC had received 216 complaints for their children's channel [[CBeebies]] having shown a repeat of a cancelled children's programme called ''[[Tweenies]]'' the previous day, that showed a character impersonating Jimmy Savile by wearing a blonde wig, mimicking Savile's accent and using Savile's catchphrase "Now then, guys and gals". Government communications industry regulatory body [[Ofcom]] said it had received "tens" of complaints as well. The episode had been produced in 2001, over a decade before the scandal came to light, and the programme had ended production entirely in 2003. The BBC responded with the following:

"This morning CBeebies broadcast a repeat of an episode of the ''Tweenies'', originally made in 2001, featuring a character dressed as a DJ impersonating Jimmy Savile. This programme will not be repeated and we are very sorry for any offence caused."<ref>{{Cite news|url=https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-21108337|title=BBC gets 216 Savile spoof complaints|year=2013|work=BBC News|access-date=21 August 2018}}</ref>

===November 2012: Lord McAlpine falsely implicated in child abuse scandal===
In the aftermath of the Jimmy Savile scandal, ''Newsnight'' investigated the [[North Wales child abuse scandal]]. On 2 November 2012, a former resident of the Bryn Estyn children's home was reported on ''Newsnight'' claiming that a prominent, but unnamed, former Conservative politician had sexually abused him during the 1970s.<ref name="Daily Telegraph 03 November 2012">{{cite news|last=Sawyer |first=Patrick |title=Call for new investigation into north Wales abuse scandal |url=https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/crime/9652824/BBCs-Newsnight-airs-claims-of-child-abuse-against-leading-Tory-politician.html |access-date=6 November 2012 |newspaper=[[The Daily Telegraph]] |date=3 November 2012 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20121106002007/http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/crime/9652824/BBCs-Newsnight-airs-claims-of-child-abuse-against-leading-Tory-politician.html |archive-date=6 November 2012 |location=London |url-status=live }}</ref> The rumour was spread by users of [[Twitter]] and other social media which identified the politician. After ''[[The Guardian]]'' reported a possible case of mistaken identity,<ref>{{cite news |last1=Leigh|first1=David|last2=Morris|first2=Steven|last3=Van der Zee|first3=Bibi |url=https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2012/nov/08/mistaken-identity-tory-abuse-claim |title="Mistaken identity" led to top Tory abuse claim |work=The Guardian |date=8 November 2012 |access-date=9 November 2012 |location=London}}</ref> [[Lord McAlpine]] issued a strong denial that he was in any way involved, asserting that the allegations were wholly false and seriously defamatory.{{Citation needed|date=March 2022}} The accuser unreservedly apologised, admitting that, as soon as he saw a photograph of the individual, he realised he had been mistaken.{{Citation needed|date=March 2022}} The BBC also apologised.{{Citation needed|date=March 2022}}

McAlpine began legal proceedings against the broadcasters who had made allegations,<ref>{{cite news |url=https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-20269114|title="Mistaken identity" led to top Tory abuse claim |work=BBC News |date=9 November 2012 |access-date=9 November 2012 }}</ref> eventually settling for £185,000 from the BBC and £125,000 from [[ITV (TV channel)|ITV]].<ref name=telegraph>{{cite news|last=Swinford|first=Steven|title=Lord McAlpine settles with ITV for £125,000|url=https://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/tvandradio/bbc/9696080/Lord-McAlpine-settles-with-ITV-for-125000.html|newspaper=The Telegraph|date=22 November 2012|location=London}}</ref> In a subsequent libel case, [[Sally Bercow]], wife of [[John Bercow]], [[Speaker of the House of Commons (United Kingdom)|Speaker of the House of Commons]], was prosecuted for libel regarding her Twitter posting which named McAlpine. Following a High Court verdict in favour of the plaintiff, where Bercow's comment was found to have been defamatory, she paid undisclosed damages to McAlpine.<ref>{{cite web|author=Adam Sherwin |url=https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/twitter-libel-sally-bercow-says-she-has-learned-the-hard-way-as-she-settles-with-tory-peer-lord-8630653.html |title=Twitter libel: Sally Bercow says she has 'learned the hard way' as she settles with Tory peer Lord McAlpine over libellous tweet |work=The Independent |date=24 May 2013 |access-date=15 January 2018}}</ref>

The decision to broadcast the ''Newsnight'' report without contacting its subject led to further criticism of the BBC, and the resignation of its Director-General, [[George Entwistle]] on 10 November.<ref>{{cite news|url=https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-20286198 |title=BBC needs 'radical overhaul', says Lord Patten |publisher=BBC |date=1 January 1970 |access-date=11 November 2012}}</ref> It was later announced that Entwistle's severance package was in excess of £1.3 million. [[Harriet Harman]], Labour's Shadow Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport, declared that Entwistle had been rewarded for 'failure'.<ref>[https://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/tvandradio/bbc/9671132/Threat-to-Lord-Patten-as-BBC-chief-George-Entwistle-gets-1.3m-pay-off.html "Threat to Lord Patten as BBC chief George Entwistle gets £1.3m pay-off"], ''The Daily Telegraph'', 12 November 2012</ref>

===July 2013: Executive payoffs===
The large [[severance payment]]s given to departing BBC executives came to widespread media attention in 2013 when the [[National Audit Office (United Kingdom)|National Audit Office]] conducted an investigation into BBC senior management pay. The practice had been going on for a number of years. Senior executives whose payments were criticised included: chief operating officer [[Caroline Thomson]], who received a total of £680,400 on her departure in 2011; Deputy Director-General [[Mark Byford]] who also left the BBC in 2011, taking £949,000; CEO of [[BBC Worldwide]] [[John Smith (executive)|John Smith]] who was paid a total of £1,031,000 in 2011 (he later returned £205,000); [[George Entwistle]] who left the Director-General job after only 54 days following the Savile crisis, and received a payment of £511,500; and [[Roly Keating]], the head of [[BBC Archives]], who received a £375,000 severance payment in 2012 (which he later repaid in full). [[Margaret Hodge]], chair of the [[Public Accounts Committee (United Kingdom)|Public Accounts Committee]], criticised the practice, calling it an "outrageous waste of licence fee payers' money." Following his appointment as Director General, Lord Hall introduced a £150,000 cap on severance payments.<ref>{{cite news|title=BBC accused of 'corporate fraud and cronyism' over payouts for rule-breaking executives|url=https://www.independent.co.uk/news/media/tv-radio/bbc-accused-of-corporate-fraud-and-cronyism-over-payouts-for-rulebreaking-executives-8700962.html|access-date=29 July 2013|newspaper=The Independent|date=10 July 2013|location=London|first=Adam|last=Sherwin}}</ref> [[Mark Thompson (media executive)|Mark Thompson]] stated to the PAC that the payments had been fully approved by the BBC Trust.<ref>{{cite news|title=Mark Thompson insists BBC Trust was informed about head of news Mark Byford's £1m pay-off|url=http://www.pressgazette.co.uk/mark-thomson-insists-bbc-trust-was-informed-about-head-news-mark-byfords-%C2%A31m-pay|access-date=29 July 2013|newspaper=Press Gazette|date=12 July 2013}}</ref>

===November 2013: ''Generation War''===
BBC plans to broadcast the German [[ZDF]] film ''Generation War''<ref>{{cite news|title=BBC Two to show ground-breaking German drama, Generation War|url=https://www.bbc.co.uk/mediacentre/latestnews/2013/generation-war.html|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130819091608/http://www.bbc.co.uk/mediacentre/latestnews/2013/generation-war.html|url-status=dead|archive-date=19 August 2013|access-date=16 November 2013}}</ref> upset certain British residents of Polish origin, as the film had already been accused of slandering the Polish anti-Nazi underground Armia Krajowa as anti-Semites, and of portraying false stereotypes of Poles and Germans during the period of occupation.<ref>{{cite news|title=TV Drama reopens debate over Germans' war guilt|url=http://bigstory.ap.org/article/tv-drama-reopens-debate-over-germans-war-guilt|access-date=16 November 2013}}</ref> In Germany, after ambassador Jerzy Marganski sent a letter of complaint to ZDF, the broadcaster provided corrective actions producing and broadcasting film 'Kampf ums Überleben'.<ref>{{cite news |title=Kampf ums Überleben. Polen unter deutscher Besatzung|url=http://www.zdf.de/ZDF/zdfportal/programdata/08f09dee-c131-3898-beea-3efa0cea90b0/20187969|access-date=16 November 2013}}</ref>

===August 2014: Coverage of Cliff Richard's property search===
On 14 August 2014, Sir [[Cliff Richard]]'s apartment in Berkshire was searched by [[South Yorkshire Police]] in relation to an alleged historical sexual assault on a boy aged under 16.<ref name=BBCAug14>{{cite news|url=https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-28790718|title=Sir Cliff Richard's Berkshire property searched by police|work=[[BBC News]]|date=14 August 2014|access-date=14 August 2014|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140814133233/http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-28790718|archive-date=14 August 2014|url-status=dead}}</ref> After police tipped off BBC journalist [[Dan Johnson (journalist)|Dan Johnson]],<ref>{{Cite news |date=2 September 2014 |title=Cliff Richard raid: Police accused of 'sheer incompetence'|work=BBC News |url=https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-29034230 |access-date=16 February 2023}}</ref> BBC reporters were on the scene as police arrived, and a BBC helicopter covered the raid as it happened.<ref name=smhAug14>{{cite news |url=http://www.smh.com.au/world/bbc-under-fire-over-role-in-cliff-richard-raid-20140819-105rly.html|title=BBC under fire over role in Cliff Richard raid|work=[[The Sydney Morning Herald]]|date=19 August 2014|access-date=21 August 2014}}</ref> Richard, who was in Portugal at the time, released a statement asserting that the allegation was "completely false" and complained that the press appeared to have been given advance notice of the search – whereas he had not been.<ref name=GuardAug14>{{cite news |url=https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2014/aug/14/cliff-richard-denies-wrongdoing-police-raid-sexual-assault-allegations-billy-graham-rally|title=Cliff Richard denies allegations of sexual assault as police raid UK home|author1=Vikram Dodd |author2=Haroon Siddique |name-list-style=amp|newspaper=[[The Guardian]]|location=London|date=14 August 2014|access-date=14 August 2014}}</ref> The BBC's home affairs correspondent, Danny Shaw, stated that the media presence at Richard's home "was highly unusual – it appears to be a deliberate attempt by police to ensure maximum coverage", but added: "That's not illegal – but there are strict guidelines."<ref name=BBCAug14/> South Yorkshire Police initially denied leaking details of the property search, but later confirmed that they had been "working with a media outlet" about the investigation.<ref name=robertson>{{cite news |last=Robertson |first=Geoffrey |title=The way the police have treated Cliff Richard is completely unacceptable |url=https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/comment/the-way-the-police-have-treated-cliff-richard-is-completely-unacceptable-9672367.html |access-date=16 August 2014 |work=The Independent |location=London |date=21 August 2014}}</ref>

By 19 August, the BBC were reported to have received up to 594 complaints regarding the coverage.<ref>{{cite news |title=MP questions police-media links after Sir Cliff Richard search |url=https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-28853641 |access-date=19 August 2014 |work=BBC News |date=21 August 2014 |archive-date=21 August 2014 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140821050842/http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-28853641 |url-status=dead }}</ref> Barrister and broadcaster [[Geoffrey Robertson]] questioned the legality of the search and called for an independent inquiry into the police operation and the prior leaking to media of the property search.<ref name=robertson /> Former Attorney General [[Dominic Grieve]] accused the police of having a "collusive relationship" with the BBC, claiming that the decision to tip off the BBC "seems quite extraordinary."<ref>{{cite news |title=Police complain over Sir Cliff Richard search 'leak' |url=https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-28823699 |access-date=17 August 2014 |work=BBC News |date=17 August 2014 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140817121934/http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-28823699 |archive-date=17 August 2014 |url-status=dead }}</ref> Officials from the BBC and South Yorkshire Police were called before the [[Home Affairs Select Committee]] on 2 September. There, the chief constable of South Yorkshire Police accused the BBC of "extortion"; however, MPs dismissed this, with chairman [[Keith Vaz]] stating that the BBC had "acted perfectly properly" in its coverage of the raid.<ref>{{cite news |last=Hewlett |first=Steve |title=Cliff Richard raid: The BBC's breaking news dilemma |url=https://www.theguardian.com/media/media-blog/2014/sep/07/cliff-richard-bbc-breaking-news-dilemma |access-date=8 September 2014 |work=The Guardian |date=7 September 2014}}</ref>

After being told he would not be charged in June 2016, Richard said that he was considering suing the BBC. The BBC apologised for "distress" caused by its coverage but stood by the story as it believed it was in the public interest.<ref>{{cite news |last=Foster |first=Patrick |title=BBC sorry for 'distress' caused by coverage of Sir Cliff Richard sex abuse claims |url=https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/06/21/bbc-sorry-for-distress-caused-by-coverage-of-sir-cliff-richard-s/ |access-date=23 June 2016 |work=The Daily Telegraph |date=23 June 2016}}</ref> Richard sued the BBC and was awarded £210,000 in damages in July 2018 after London's High Court ruled that the broadcaster had infringed his right to privacy.<ref>{{cite news |last=Cowell |first=Alan |title=Cliff Richard, British Pop Star, Wins Privacy Suit Against BBC |url=https://www.nytimes.com/2018/07/18/world/europe/cliff-richard-bbc.html |access-date=18 July 2018 |work=The New York Times|date=20 July 2018}}</ref>

===September 2014: Coverage of Scottish independence campaign===
{{See also|Criticism of the BBC#Scottish independence referendum, 2014}}
Throughout the campaign preceding the [[2014 Scottish independence referendum|Scottish independence referendum]] held on 18 September 2014, there were accusations claiming that the BBC was neither neutral nor impartial.

On 14 September 2014, thousands of protesters demonstrated outside BBC Scotland's headquarters in Glasgow accusing the corporation and its political editor [[Nick Robinson (journalist)|Nick Robinson]] of broadcasting "lies" and of being "biased" against the [[Yes Scotland]] campaign.<ref>{{cite web|last=Green|first=Chris|title=BBC Scotland protests: Scottish independence referendum coverage 'institutionally biased', Salmond claims|url=https://www.independent.co.uk/news/media/bbc-scotland-protests-scottish-independence-referendum-coverage-institutionally-biased-salmond-claims-9732095.html|website=The Independent|date=14 September 2014|access-date=14 September 2014}}</ref> The demonstrators demanded that Robinson be dismissed.<ref>Ben Riley-Smith [https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/scottish-independence/11095752/Scottish-independence-Nationalists-demand-Nick-Robinson-sacking-in-vocal-anti-BBC-protest.html "Scottish independence: Nationalists demand Nick Robinson sacking in vocal anti-BBC protest"], ''The Daily Telegraph'', 14 September 2014</ref> The 'Yes' campaign was not itself involved in the demonstration. The protestors also later complained that coverage about the demonstration was not broadcast by the BBC.<ref>Frankie Boyle, "Who doesn't want to see Jeremy Corbyn elected? It would be a glorious six-day reign". The Guardian, 19 January 2016. [https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/jan/19/frankie-boyle-jeremy-corbyn-elected-destroyed-murdoch]</ref>

[[Alex Salmond]], Scotland's First Minister and leader of the [[Scottish National Party]], agreed with the view that the BBC was biased in favour of retaining the union. However, in an interview given after his clash with Robinson, he said he believed it was the fault of the BBC's London-based staff rather than [[BBC Scotland]] itself.<ref>[http://www.heraldscotland.com/politics/referendum-news/is-the-bbcs-coverage-biased-yes-absolutely-dont-get-me-wrong-i-like-these-f.25322002 "'Is the BBC's coverage biased? Yes, absolutely ... Don't get me wrong, I like these folk, but they don't realise they're biased. It's the unconscious bias which is extraordinary'"], ''Sunday Herald'', 14 September 2014</ref>

Professor John Robertson and a team at the [[University of the West of Scotland]] monitored news broadcasts of the BBC and ITV until September 2013 for their study ''Fairness in the First Year''. The report found that the BBC was biased against the 'Yes' campaign in matters of airtime, sequencing of news items, prevalence of "bad news" items, and misleading presentation of sources as impartial.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://worldofstuart.excellentcontent.com/repository/FairnessInTheFirstYear.pdf |title=Fairness in the First Year? BBC and ITV Coverage of the Scottish Referendum Campaign from September 2012 to September 2013 |author=John Robertson |publisher=worldofstuart.excellentcontent.com |date=19 January 2014 |access-date=15 January 2018 }}</ref><ref>John Robertson [https://www.opendemocracy.net/ourkingdom/john-robertson/bbc-bias-and-scots-referendum-new-report "BBC bias and the Scots referendum – new report"] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20181204045146/https://www.opendemocracy.net/ourkingdom/john-robertson/bbc-bias-and-scots-referendum-new-report |date=4 December 2018 }}, ''Our Kingdom'' (''Open Democracy''), 21 February 2014</ref> John Boothman, BBC Scotland's head of news and current affairs, rejected Robertson's accusation that the BBC had suppressed coverage of the report, while Ken MacQuarrie, director of BBC Scotland, rejected the report's allegations.<ref>Scott Macnab [http://www.scotsman.com/news/politics/top-stories/bbc-portrayed-alex-salmond-as-figure-of-fun-1-3335594 "BBC portrayed Alex Salmond as 'figure of fun'"], ''The Scotsman'', 11 March 2014</ref><ref>[http://news.stv.tv/politics/268054-john-robertson-blasts-coverage-of-research-into-referendum-media-bias/ "Academic blasts coverage of research into referendum 'media bias'"] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160304072224/http://news.stv.tv/politics/268054-john-robertson-blasts-coverage-of-research-into-referendum-media-bias/ |date=4 March 2016 }}, STV, 11 March 2014</ref>

===January 2015: ''The Secret World of Lewis Carroll'' and contributors===
The BBC commissioned documentary by Swan Films, "The Secret World of Lewis Carroll" aired on [[BBC Two]] at 9pm on 31 January 2015. 2015 itself marked the 150th Anniversary year of the publication of [[Alice's Adventures in Wonderland]] by [[Lewis Carroll]], which the documentary was commissioned to celebrate.  A press release, issued a week prior to broadcast, stated:  "To mark the 150th anniversary of its publication, this documentary explores the life and the imagination of the man who wrote it, the Reverend Charles Dodgson, better known as Lewis Carroll. Broadcaster and journalist [[Martha Kearney]] delves into the biographies of both Carroll and of the young girl Alice Liddell, who inspired his most famous creation."<ref>{{Cite web |title=The Secret World Of Lewis Carroll |url=https://www.bbc.co.uk/mediacentre/proginfo/2015/05/bbc.com/mediacentre/proginfo/2015/05/secret-world-of-lewis-carroll/ |access-date=23 May 2023 |publisher=BBC}}{{dead link|date=September 2025|bot=medic}}{{cbignore|bot=medic}}</ref>

Upon broadcast, an amount of airtime was given over to speculation over a nude photo of a young girl, which the documentary pushed as being by Carroll. The views given were by a forensic consultancy for image analysis, and a photo conservationist. On 4 February, one of the contributors to the programme, biographer Jenny Woolf, claimed to not have been told the documentary would be featuring this photo, and that she did not have time to provide counterclaims. "They had people with no relevant expertise in photographic history or knowledge of Carroll's life, whose entirely personal hunches were offered airtime…. on the other hand they didn't tell their own relevant experts anything about the image, so their opposing views were not given airtime or discussion."<ref>{{Cite web |title=From Somewhere in Time » THE SECRET WORLD OF LEWIS CARROLL |url=https://www.jabberwock.co.uk/blog/index.php?itemid=1364 |access-date=23 May 2023 |website=jabberwock.co.uk}}</ref> Another contributor, Edward Wakeling, claimed in June 2015 that "[The BBC] broke their code of conduct. When they had a controversial subject like this they should have checked it out."<ref>{{Cite news |last=Sanderson |first=David |date=23 May 2023 |title=BBC portrayal of Lewis Carroll as abuser 'a lie' |newspaper=[[The Times]]|url=https://www.thetimes.com/culture/tv-radio/article/bbc-portrayal-of-lewis-carroll-as-abuser-a-lie-pm9f0r35gv0 |access-date=23 May 2023 |issn=0140-0460}}</ref>

Later that year, the documentary was reprimanded by the [[BBC Trust]] for failing to give contributors notice of the changed content of the programme. "The image of the naked girl was a prominent feature of the programme and its discovery had meant that the nature of the programme had changed significantly from the original commission. … The Trustees recognised that the BBC had made some effort at a late stage to inform the contributors of the programme's changes … The programme should have gone back to the contributors at an earlier stage to inform them about the new image and to give them adequate time to consider whether they were content with their contributions"<ref>{{Cite web |title=BBC failed to tell experts that Lewis Carroll documentary would include 'paedophile' claims |url=https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/bbc/12050278/BBC-failed-to-tell-experts-that-Lewis-Carroll-documentary-would-include-paedophile-claims.html |access-date=23 May 2023 |website=The Daily Telegraph|date=14 December 2015 }}</ref>

===January 2015: Tim Willcox antisemitism allegation===
While covering a unity rally after the [[Hypercacher kosher supermarket siege|antisemitic massacre at a Hypercacher kosher supermarket]] in Paris and [[Charlie Hebdo shooting|''Charlie Hebdo'' terror attack]], on 11 January 2015, the BBC's [[Tim Willcox]] interrupted the daughter of a [[Holocaust]] survivor discussing antisemitism in France by saying: "Many critics though, of Israel's policy would suggest that the Palestinians suffer hugely at Jewish hands as well".<ref name=":1">{{Cite web|date=16 June 2016|title=BBC's Charlie Hebdo interview cleared over antisemitic complaints|url=http://www.theguardian.com/media/2016/jun/16/bbcs-charlie-hebdo-interview-cleared-over-anti-semitic-complaints|access-date=7 December 2021|website=The Guardian}}</ref><ref name=":2">{{Cite web|date=13 January 2015|title=BBC reporter 'sorry' for making this remark on Palestine to daughter of Holocaust survivor|url=https://www.independent.co.uk/news/people/tim-willcox-apologises-to-daughter-of-holocaust-survivor-at-paris-rally-for-saying-palestinians-suffer-hugely-at-jewish-hands-as-well-9972840.html|access-date=7 December 2021|website=The Independent}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web|title=Calls for BBC reporter to go for linking Paris attack with 'Palestinian suffering'|url=http://jewishnews.timesofisrael.com/calls-sack-bbc-presenter-saying-palestinians-suffered-hugely-jewish-hands/|access-date=7 December 2021|work=The Times of Israel |date=12 January 2015 }}</ref> After widespread criticism from the Jewish community for appearing to impute responsibility for Israel's actions to all Jews as a whole (in his use of the phrase "Jewish hands") and to justify the antisemitic massacre, Willcox apologised; Willcox had also received criticism months before for appearing to claim that many Jews disliked [[Ed Miliband]] because of "mansion tax" he had proposed.<ref name=":1" /><ref name=":2" /><ref>{{Cite web|last=Newman|first=Marissa|title=BBC links Jew-hatred to Palestinian suffering 'at Jewish hands'|url=http://www.timesofisrael.com/bbc-links-jew-hatred-palestinian-suffering-at-jewish-hands/|access-date=7 December 2021|website=The Times of Israel |date=12 January 2015 }}</ref><ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.thejc.com/news/uk/bbc-defends-mansion-tax-remark-after-viewers-complaints-1.60989|access-date=7 December 2021|website=The Jewish Chronicle |title=BBC defends 'mansion tax' remark after viewers' complaints |date=12 November 2014 }}</ref> The [[BBC Trust]] ruled that Willcox's behaviour did not violate its editorial guidelines.<ref name=":1" />

===March 2015: Jeremy Clarkson's contract===
On 11 March 2015, the BBC suspended [[Jeremy Clarkson]] after a reported physical altercation with a producer.<ref name="bbc-suspended-src">{{cite news|url=https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-31824040 |title= Jeremy Clarkson, Top Gear host, suspended by BBC after 'fracas' |work= BBC News|date=10 March 2015 |access-date=10 March 2015}}</ref> It was later established that Clarkson, in a "fracas", had punched producer Oisín Tymon during an argument over catering arrangements at the ''[[Top Gear (2002 TV series)|Top Gear]]'' production crew's hotel.<ref>Jenn Selby [https://www.independent.co.uk/news/people/top-gear-producer-oisin-tymon-will-not-press-charges-against-jeremy-clarkson-following-fracas-assault-10138294.html ""], ''The Independent'', 27 March 2015</ref> A petition on [[change.org]] to reinstate Clarkson gained over one million signatures before it was delivered to the BBC.<ref>[http://www.smh.com.au/entertainment/tv-and-radio/top-gear-fracas-jeremy-clarkson-reinstatement-petition-passes-1-million-signatures-online-20150321-1m4fnb.html "Top Gear 'fracas': Jeremy Clarkson reinstatement petition passes 1 million signatures online"], ''The Sydney Morning Herald'' (AFP), 21 March 2015</ref>

On 25 March 2015, the BBC announced that [[Jeremy Clarkson]]'s ''Top Gear'' contract would not be renewed and that he would be dropped from the programme.<ref>John Plunkett and Tara Conlan [https://www.theguardian.com/media/2015/mar/25/jeremy-clarkson-top-gear-contract-bbc "Jeremy Clarkson dropped by BBC after damning report into attack on producer"], ''The Guardian'', 25 March 2015</ref> After an internal investigation, the final decision had been taken by [[Tony Hall, Baron Hall of Birkenhead|Tony Hall]], director general of the BBC.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.bbc.co.uk/mediacentre/statements/jeremy-clarkson-dg-statement|title=BBC Director-General's statement regarding Jeremy Clarkson – Media centre|work=BBC News|date=25 April 2015|access-date=25 March 2015}}</ref> This development led the other ''Top Gear'' presenters, [[Richard Hammond]] and [[James May]], to support Clarkson by quitting ''Top Gear'' themselves (by allowing their BBC contracts to expire at the end of March without renewal).<ref>{{cite web|last=Singh|first=Anita|url=https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/bbc/11506618/Top-Gear-Richard-Hammond-and-James-May-no-longer-work-for-the-BBC.html|title=Top Gear: Richard Hammond and James May no longer work for the BBC|work=The Daily Telegraph|date=31 March 2015|access-date=19 April 2015}}</ref>

===January 2016: co-ordinated on-air resignation of Stephen Doughty===
In January 2016, the team behind the BBC's ''Daily Politics'' show co-ordinated the on-air resignation of Labour politician [[Stephen Doughty]] shortly before the start of Prime Minister's Questions. The show's output editor Andrew Alexander wrote a (later deleted) blog post for the BBC website explaining how this had come about. Alexander wrote: "We knew his resignation just before PMQs would be a dramatic moment with big political impact". The timing of the announcement ensured Labour leader [[Jeremy Corbyn]] was caught off guard. BBC News political editor [[Laura Kuenssberg]] "sealed the deal" with Doughty before filming, even though it appeared to viewers that the resignation had been unplanned. A camera crew even filmed Doughty and Kuenssberg arriving at the studio together in advance of the announcement, this to televise later on news bulletins.<ref>{{cite news |last1=Sweney |first1=Mark |title=BBC defends Stephen Doughty's resignation live on Daily Politics |url=https://www.theguardian.com/media/2016/jan/08/bbc-stephen-doughty-daily-politics-laura-kuenssberg |access-date=4 April 2020 |work=The Guardian |date=8 January 2016}}</ref>

===2017 and 2018: Gender pay gap controversy===
{{Main|BBC gender-pay-gap controversy}}

In July 2017, in response to a demand from the UK government as a condition of its new [[BBC Charter|royal charter]], the BBC published a list of all employees who earned more than £150,000.<ref name="Ruddick"/><ref name="BBCPay">[https://www.bbc.com/news/entertainment-arts-40661179 BBC pay: Male stars earn more than female talent], BBC News (19 July 2017).</ref>{{Efn|The list included only compensation paid directly from BBC's [[Television licensing in the United Kingdom|license fees]]; payments from [[BBC Worldwide]] and payments made through independent production firms were not included.<ref name="Ruddick">Graham Ruddick, [https://www.theguardian.com/media/2017/jul/19/bbc-pay-key-questions-behind-the-disclosure BBC pay: key questions behind the disclosures], ''The Guardian'' (19 July 2017).</ref><ref name="BBCPay"/>}} Of the 96 BBC employees making over this threshold, 62 were men and 34 were women, and of the seven highest earners, all were men.<ref name="Ruddick"/><ref name="Santos">Amanda Proença Santos, [https://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/bbc-s-list-top-paid-stars-sparks-controversy-over-pay-n784511 BBC's List of Top-Paid Stars Sparks Controversy Over Pay Gap, Lack of Diversity], NBC News (19 July 2017).</ref> The disclosure prompted criticism of the BBC over the [[gender pay gap]]; other critics also criticised a lack of ethnic diversity among the highest-earning BBC personalities.<ref name="BBCPay"/><ref name="Santos"/><ref>Stewart Clarke, [https://variety.com/2017/tv/global/bbc-reveals-stars-salaries-controversy-pay-gender-women-1202499715/ BBC Reveals Stars' Salaries Amid Controversy Over Pay for Women], ''Variety''.</ref>

Early in January 2018, it was announced that [[Carrie Gracie]], the BBC's China editor, had resigned from the role because of the salary gender disparity.<ref>{{cite news|url=https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-42598775|title=BBC China editor Carrie Gracie quits post in equal pay row|work=BBC News|date=8 January 2018|access-date=26 January 2018}}</ref> A pre-broadcast conversation between ''[[Today (BBC Radio 4)|Today]]'' presenter [[John Humphrys]] and [[Jon Sopel]], the BBC's North America editor, was leaked a few days later. Humphrys was recorded joking about the disparity. BBC management itself was said to be "deeply unimpressed" with Humphrys' comments.<ref>{{cite news|last=Batchelor|first=Tom|url=https://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/tv/news/john-humphrys-bbc-pay-gap-carrie-gracie-radio-4-today-jon-sopel-leaked-recording-gender-equality-a8154771.html|title=John Humphrys joked about gender pay gap after BBC China editor Carrie Gracie resigned, leaked tape reveals|work=The Independent|date=12 January 2018|access-date=26 January 2018}}</ref>

It became known on 26 January that some of the BBC's leading male presenters would take a pay cut. According to the BBC's media editor [[Amol Rajan]], [[Huw Edwards]], [[Jeremy Vine]], and John Humphrys were among those to have agreed to a salary reduction.<ref>{{cite news|title=Some BBC male presenters agree pay cut|url=https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-42827333|work= BBC News|date=26 January 2018|access-date=26 January 2018}}</ref>

===2019: Naga Munchetty accused of breaching BBC rules===
In September 2019, the BBC upheld a complaint against [[Naga Munchetty]] for having breached BBC rules by giving an opinion on comments made by [[Donald Trump]].<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-49837511|title=BBC gives more detail on Naga Munchetty ruling|date=26 September 2019|website=BBC News|access-date=29 May 2020}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-49825570|title=Naga Munchetty 'breached BBC rules' with Trump comments|date=25 September 2019|website=BBC News|access-date=29 May 2020}}</ref> Munchetty was reprimanded by the BBC for breaching its charter.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.theguardian.com/media/2019/sep/30/bbc-racism-row-naga-munchetty-complaint-was-also-about-dan-walker|title=BBC racism row: Naga Munchetty complaint was also about co-host Dan Walker|author=Jim Waterson|date=30 September 2019|website=The Guardian|access-date=29 May 2020}}</ref> After representations in her favour from many sources, Munchetty was cleared by Lord Hall, who commented: "racism is racism and the BBC is not impartial on the topic".<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-49850738|title=BBC urged to reconsider Naga Munchetty complaint decision|date=27 September 2019|website=BBC News|access-date=29 May 2020}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-49883952|title=BBC reverses decision on Naga Munchetty complaint|date=30 September 2019|website=BBC News|access-date=29 May 2020}}</ref>

===2019: Removal of audience laughter from ''Question Time'' footage in a news report===
In a special ''[[Question Time (TV programme)|Question Time]]'' leaders' debate held on 22 November 2019 ahead of [[2019 United Kingdom general election|that year's UK general election]], the leader of the [[Conservative Party (UK)|Conservative Party]] and the [[Prime Minister of the UK]] [[Boris Johnson]] was met with a question from an audience member about being honest in Johnson's position. The question was subsequently followed by laughter and applause from the rest of the audience, while Johnson struggled to answer.<ref name="TheGuardian-19NOV25-QTJohnsonLaughter">{{cite news |last1=Waterson |first1=Jim |title=BBC admits 'mistake' in editing out laughter at Johnson in TV debate |url=https://www.theguardian.com/media/2019/nov/25/bbc-admits-mistake-in-editing-out-laughter-at-johnson-in-tv-debate |access-date=3 December 2019 |work=[[The Guardian]] |date=25 November 2019}}</ref>

The footage from the moment was largely untouched (complete with sound) in a report broadcast during that night's ''[[BBC News at Ten]]'', but in another report about the same debate aired during the shorter [[BBC Weekend News|Saturday lunchtime bulletin]] the next day, the laughter had been removed from the footage. A user on Twitter raised attention to the difference.<ref name="TheGuardian-19NOV25-QTJohnsonLaughter" /> Journalist [[Peter Oborne]] compared the incident to the [[Censorship in the Soviet Union|censorship]] in Soviet television, while BBC News presenter [[Huw Edwards]] defended that it was an error rather than a conspiracy.<ref name="TheGuardian-19NOV25-QTJohnsonLaughter" /><ref>{{Cite tweet|number=1198302260708757510|user=OborneTweets|title=It seems they did. This kind of thing was normal on state TV in Soviet Russia. Should not happen in a democracy like Britain. The BBC urgently needs to explain itself.|date=23 November 2019|author=Oborne, Peter|author-link=Peter Oborne}}</ref>

The BBC had initially defended the decision, claiming it was for timing reasons. However, the corporation later admitted that it was a "mistake".<ref name="TheGuardian-19NOV25-QTJohnsonLaughter" />

==2020–present==
===2020: Emily Maitlis remarks on the Dominic Cummings coronavirus controversy===
{{See also|Dominic Cummings scandal}}
During the [[COVID-19 lockdown in the United Kingdom|COVID-19 lockdown]], it emerged that [[Dominic Cummings]], chief adviser to Prime Minister [[Boris Johnson]], had [[Dominic Cummings scandal|travelled from London to his parents' house]] in County Durham. Cummings defended his actions and received the backing of Johnson, sparking accusations of double standards in the enforcement of the lockdown.<ref>{{cite news |title=Pressure on Dominic Cummings to quit over lockdown breach |url=https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2020/may/22/dominic-cummings-durham-trip-coronavirus-lockdown |access-date=23 May 2020 |work=The Guardian |date=22 May 2020}}</ref><ref>{{Cite news|url=https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-52784290|title=What did Dominic Cummings do during lockdown?|work=BBC News|date=25 May 2020}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.estateagenttoday.co.uk/features/2020/5/dominic-cummings--lessons-for-the-agency-industry|title=Dominic Cummings – lessons for the agency industry|website=Estate Agent Today|date=30 May 2020}}</ref> On 26 May, [[Emily Maitlis]], host of BBC's ''[[Newsnight]]'', delivered a highly critical direct-to-camera piece about the affair, stating that "[[Dominic Cummings]] broke the rules, the country can see that, and it's shocked the government cannot... He made those who struggled to keep to the rules feel like fools, and has allowed many more to assume they can now flout them. The prime minister knows all this, but despite the resignation of one minister, growing unease from his backbenchers, a dramatic early warning from the polls, and a deep national disquiet, [[Boris Johnson]] has chosen to ignore it. Tonight, we consider what this blind loyalty tells us about the workings of Number 10." The piece was criticised as being unduly biased and unsuitable for an impartial broadcaster. The BBC later stated that the piece "did not meet our standards of due impartiality".<ref>{{cite news |title=Newsnight 'breached BBC impartiality guidelines' |url=https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-52824508 |work=BBC News |date=27 May 2020}}</ref>

===2020: Churchill Bengal famine comments===
In 2020, a ''[[BBC News at Ten]]'' report featured Indian historian [[Rudrangshu Mukherjee]] saying that the former British prime minister [[Winston Churchill]] was "seen as the precipitator of mass killing" due to allegations of his failure in the [[Bengal famine of 1943]]. Claims of anti-South Asian racism were also made against Churchill by Oxford University professor [[Yasmin Khan]].<ref name="Moore-Church">{{cite news |last1=Moore |first1=Matthew |title=Historians accuse BBC News at Ten of tarnishing Winston Churchill |url=https://www.thetimes.com/article/historians-accuse-bbc-news-at-ten-of-tarnishing-winston-churchill-3b6srt9vb |access-date=7 September 2021 |work=[[The Times]] |date=23 July 2020}}</ref>

Historians [[Tirthankar Roy]] and [[James Holland (author)|James Holland]] criticised the accuracy of the report. The historian [[Max Hastings]] also criticised the report for failing to contextualise Churchill's actions and former ''Panorama'' journalist [[Tom Mangold]] of uncritically endorsing a "[[woke]]" view of Churchill as a racist.<ref name="Moore-Church"/>

===2020: Usage of the word 'Nigger' in a news report===
In 2020, a BBC News report included usage of the racial slur [[nigger]]. 18,600 complaints were made, leading the BBC to apologise on 9 August of that year. The use of the word was part of a [[content warning]] for a following clip.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/tv/news/bbc-n-word-racism-bristol-complaints-a9657586.html|title = BBC hit with 18,600 complaints for use of n-word in news report|website = [[The Independent]]|date = 6 August 2020}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web|url=https://edition.cnn.com/2020/08/10/media/bbc-apology-offensive-language-scli-intl-gbr/index.html|title=BBC apologizes for use of N-word in news report|date=10 August 2020 }}</ref>

===2021: Coverage of the death of Prince Philip===
In the days following the [[death of Prince Philip]], the BBC received over 100,000 complaints, a record number for British television,<ref>{{cite news |last1=Waterson |first1=Jim |title=BBC's Prince Philip coverage breaks UK TV complaints record |url=https://theguardian.com/media/2021/apr/12/bbcs-prince-philip-coverage-breaks-uk-tv-complaints-record |access-date=2 May 2021 |work=The Guardian |date=12 April 2021}}</ref> accusing BBC of excessive coverage and its perceived attempt to manufacture a largely absent national grief.<ref>{{cite news |last1=Merrick |first1=John |title=Stop Trying to Make Us Worship the Royals |url=https://jacobinmag.com/2021/04/prince-philip-british-royalty-royal-family-abolish-windsor |access-date=17 April 2021 |work=Jacobin Magazine |date=17 April 2021}}</ref>

===2021: Martin Bashir accused of lying to gain his 1995 interview with Diana, Princess of Wales===
In 2021, accusations were made that [[Martin Bashir]], a former interviewer for the BBC programme ''[[Panorama (British TV programme)|Panorama]]'', had lied to gain his [[An Interview with HRH The Princess of Wales|1995 interview]] with [[Diana, Princess of Wales]].<ref name="dianaexpose">{{cite news|url=https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2021/05/20/exposed-bbcs-failure-properly-investigate-martin-bashirs-diana/|title=Exposed: The BBC's failure to properly investigate Martin Bashir's Diana interview|work=The Daily Telegraph|access-date=21 May 2021|date=20 May 2021}}</ref> Both of Diana's sons, [[Prince William]] and [[Prince Harry]], released statements condemning Bashir and calling his practices unethical.<ref>{{cite news|url=https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2021/05/20/duke-cambridge-bbc-fuelled-mothers-paranoia/|title=Duke of Cambridge: The BBC fuelled my mother's paranoia|work=The Daily Telegraph|access-date=21 May 2021|date=20 May 2021}}</ref><ref>{{cite news|url=https://variety.com/2021/tv/news/prince-harry-panorama-diana-lord-dyson-1234978046/|title=Princes Harry and William Respond to Bombshell Investigation Into BBC Diana Interview: 'Unethical Practices Took Her Life'|work=Variety|access-date=21 May 2021|date=20 May 2021}}</ref> [[Scotland Yard]] stated that it would assess what had happened to see whether a criminal investigation was needed.<ref>{{cite news|url=https://www.telegraph.co.uk/royal-family/2021/05/21/martin-bashir-bbc-princess-diana-prince-harry-duke-sussex-prince/|title=Martin Bashir Diana BBC interview: Scotland Yard to 'assess contents' to see if criminal investigation is needed|work=The Daily Telegraph|access-date=21 May 2021|date=21 May 2021}}</ref> As a result of the controversy, the former BBC director general [[Tony Hall, Baron Hall of Birkenhead|Lord Hall]] resigned as the chairman of the [[National Gallery]].<ref>{{cite news|url=https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-57212959|access-date=22 May 2021|date=22 May 2021|publisher=BBC News|title=Diana interview: Lord Hall resigns from National Gallery}}</ref>

===2021: Tala Halawa controversy===
In May 2021, the media reported that Tala Halawa, who joined the BBC in 2017 and was reporting on the Israeli–Palestinian conflict, had posted anti-Israel and anti-Semitic tweets in 2014. Among her postings, Halawa had tweeted "#Hitler was right" and "Zionists can't get enough of our blood".<ref>{{Cite web|date=24 May 2021|title=BBC investigating journalist who tweeted 'Hitler was right'|url=https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/bbc-journalist-twitter-israel-nazi-b1852684.html|access-date=5 July 2021|website=The Independent}}</ref><ref name=":0">{{Cite web|last=Zitser|first=Joshua|title=Palestinian BBC journalist who tweeted that 'Hitler was right' is being investigated by the broadcaster|url=https://www.businessinsider.com/bbc-investigate-palestinian-reporter-who-said-hitler-was-right-2021-5|access-date=5 July 2021|website=Business Insider}}</ref> As Halawa was reporting on the [[2021 Israel–Palestine crisis|2021 Israeli–Palestinian Crisis]], doubts about her credibility as a neutral and objective reporter were raised.<ref name=":0" />  In June 2021, the BBC announced that Halawa no longer worked for the BBC without providing further details.<ref>{{Cite web|title=BBC writer who tweeted 'Hitler was right' is no longer with broadcaster|url=https://www.jpost.com/diaspora/bbc-writer-who-tweeted-hitler-was-right-is-no-longer-with-broadcaster-671136|access-date=5 July 2021|website=[[The Jerusalem Post]]|date=16 June 2021 |issn=0792-822X}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web|last=Liphshiz|first=Cnaan|title=BBC writer who tweeted 'Hitler was right' no longer works at broadcaster|url=https://www.timesofisrael.com/bbc-writer-who-tweeted-hitler-was-right-no-longer-works-at-broadcaster/|access-date=5 July 2021|website=The Times of Israel |date=16 June 2021 }}</ref> Halawa later issued a written statement, in which she blamed her dismissal on "external pro-Israel interest groups," and "pro-Israel censorship campaigns", and said that she had been dismissed due to the desire to "eliminate Palestinians from public life." She also said in the statement that she had been targeted by "pro-Israel groups" because she had "recently published a video report for the corporation about celebrities being criticized trolled and canceled for supporting Palestinian self-determination".<ref>{{Cite web|title=BBC journalist fired for 'Hitler was right' tweet blames 'pro-Israel mob'|url=https://www.timesofisrael.com/bbc-journalist-fired-for-hitler-was-right-tweet-blames-pro-israel-mob/|access-date=2 December 2021|website=The Times of Israel |date=16 July 2021 }}</ref>

===2021: "We're being pressured into sex by some trans women" controversy===
{{Excerpt|"We're being pressured into sex by some trans women"}}

===2021: Coverage of antisemitic incident in Oxford Street===
BBC online coverage of an incident in [[Oxford Street]], in which a group of men were filmed spitting, shouting verbal abuse<ref name="jcnoevidenceofslur" /> and in one case making a<ref name=bbcoxfordst2021 /> [[Nazi salute]]<ref name="jcnoevidenceofslur" /> at a privately hired bus carrying Jewish youths celebrating [[Chanukkah|Hanukkah]], claimed that racial slurs about Muslims could be heard inside the bus. This was later amended to state that a single "slur about Muslims" could be heard on the video.<ref name=bbcoxfordst2021>{{cite news|url=https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-59495842|title=Oxford Street: Images issued after men filmed spitting at Jews on bus|author=Harry Farley|work=BBC News|date=2 December 2021}} Contains update line referring to the amendment to the text</ref> The revised claim of even a single slur was dismissed by the [[Metropolitan Police]]<ref name="jcnoevidenceofslur">{{cite news|url=https://www.thejc.com/news/news/police-find-no-evidence-of-anti-muslim-slur-during-oxford-street-hate-incident-5qenu3zOL0fK7jLlF4lpH2|work=The Jewish Chronicle|title=Police find 'no evidence' of anti-Muslim slur during Oxford Street hate incident|date=13 December 2021}}</ref> and vehemently rejected by the party on the bus, who stated that the alleged slur in English was in fact a call for help in [[Hebrew]] ({{Langx|he|תקרא למישהו, זה דחוף!}} – ''{{Transliteration|he|ISO|Tikra lemishehu, ze dachuf}}!'' – "Call someone, it's urgent!").<ref name="demonisedourchildren">{{cite news|url=https://www.thejc.com/news/news/bbc-demonised-our-children-parents-of-oxford-street-victims-say-6J1fcLl11AR0ykO5ZN3e6Y|work=The Jewish Chronicle|title=BBC demonised our children, parents of Oxford street victims say|author=Jonathan Sacerdoti|date=6 December 2021}}</ref> Parents of the victims in the bus accused the BBC of "demonis(ing) our children".<ref name="demonisedourchildren" />  The [[Board of Deputies of British Jews]] called on the BBC to apologise for the offending content.<ref>{{cite news|url=https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2021/12/05/bbc-apology-sought-report-suggesting-anti-semitic-abuse-victims|title=BBC apology sought for report suggesting anti-Semitic abuse victims responded with anti-Muslim slurs|author=Janet Eastham|work=The Daily Telegraph|date=5 December 2021}}</ref> A protest outside Broadcasting House about the BBC coverage was subsequently organised by the [[Campaign Against Antisemitism]] on 13 December 2021.<ref name="jcnoevidenceofslur" />

On 26 January 2022, the Executive Complaints Unit issued a ruling that determining that "The online article as it stands must now be regarded as no longer meeting the BBC's standards of due accuracy and, to the extent that the anti-Muslim slur claim has become controversial, it also lacks due impartiality in failing to reflect alternative views."<ref name=":3">{{Cite news|last=Burgess|first=Jake Kanter, Media Correspondent {{!}} Kaya|title=BBC sorry for 'Muslim slur' in report on antisemitic attack|newspaper=[[The Times]]|url=https://www.thetimes.com/culture/tv-radio/article/bbc-sorry-muslim-slur-report-antisemitic-attack-oxford-street-zvc5rtxpm|access-date=4 February 2022|issn=0140-0460}}</ref> The report also asserted that while the reference to the slur was included "in good faith" after an "unusually high level of consultation among colleagues", the BBC had failed to acknowledge the disputed nature of the phrase in question and had stonewalled the Jewish community's inquiries into the matter.<ref name=":3" /><ref name=":4">{{Cite web|date=26 January 2022|title=Ofcom investigates BBC over reporting of antisemitic attack|url=https://www.theguardian.com/media/2022/jan/26/ofcom-investigates-bbc-over-reporting-of-antisemitic-attack|access-date=4 February 2022|website=The Guardian}}</ref> On 3 February 2022, the BBC issued a further apology and acknowledged factually incorrect elements of its ECU report, which had incorrectly asserted that a member of the [[Community Security Trust]] had "verified" the BBC's interpretation of the phrase in question.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.thejc.com/news/news/bbc-issues-correction-for-saying-cst-verified-line-in-chanukah-attack-report-2nhMi0ZlV9O4I8JR8haiUA|access-date=4 February 2022|website=The Jewish Chronicle |title=BBC issues correction for saying CST verified line in Chanukah attack report |date=3 February 2022 }}</ref>

On 26 January 2022, after the ECU announced its report, [[Ofcom]] announced that it would conduct its own further investigation of the BBC over its handling of the incident and its aftermath.<ref name=":3" /><ref name=":4" /><ref>{{Cite news|last=Swerling|first=Gabriella|date=26 January 2022|title=BBC faces Ofcom probe after alleged 'misreporting' of anti-Semitic incident|work=The Telegraph|url=https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2022/01/26/bbc-accused-thinking-lot-anti-semitism-row-deepens/|access-date=4 February 2022|issn=0307-1235}}</ref> In November 2022, Ofcom stated in its report on the matter: "The BBC made a serious editorial misjudgment by not reporting on air, at any point, that the claim it had made about anti-Muslim slurs was disputed, once new evidence emerged. This failure to respond promptly and transparently created an impression of defensiveness by the BBC among the Jewish community."<ref>{{cite web |last1=Sweney |first1=Mark |title=Ofcom criticises BBC reporting of antisemitic attack on party bus|date=7 November 2022 |url=https://www.theguardian.com/media/2022/nov/07/ofcom-critical-of-bbc-reporting-of-antisemitic-attack-on-party-bus |work=The Guardian |access-date=7 November 2022}}</ref>

===2022: "Throwing a Paddy"===
In October 2022, in an online review of a match between Manchester United and Tottenham, [[Cristiano Ronaldo]] was accused of "throwing a Paddy" in a BBC sports blog by [[Phil McNulty]], when Ronaldo refused to come off the bench. The outdated phrase means an over the top reaction. The BBC declined to apologise but removed the phrase "throwing a Paddy" from its match review.<ref>{{Cite web |date=27 October 2022 |title=Irish rage over BBC article claiming Ronaldo was 'throwing a paddy' |url=https://extra.ie/2022/10/27/sport/soccernews/throwing-a-paddy-bbc-ronaldo |access-date=2 November 2022}}</ref>

===2023: Gary Lineker suspension===
In March 2023, [[Gary Lineker]], a sports presenter for the BBC, made a controversial tweet in which he compared the wording in the British government's "[[Illegal Migration Bill]]" to the rhetoric of Germany in the 1930s. He was subsequently suspended for what the BBC said was a violation of its impartiality policy. With other sports presenters supporting Lineker by refusing to work, the BBC changed the format of its sports output, including shortening [[Match of the Day]] and broadcasting it with crowd noise rather than a commentary.<ref>[https://edition.cnn.com/2023/03/11/football/gary-lineker-bbc-impartiality-row-boycott-spt-intl/index.html BBC's flagship soccer show boycotted over Gary Lineker impartiality row]</ref><ref>[https://news.sky.com/story/gary-lineker-row-match-of-the-day-2-expected-to-be-broadcast-in-much-reduced-format-12831932 Gary Lineker row: Match of the Day 2 expected to be broadcast in much reduced format]</ref>

===2023: Explicit pictures sent to Huw Edwards===
On 7 July 2023, ''[[The Sun (United Kingdom)|The Sun]]'' published a story stating that a woman had alleged to the BBC on 19 May that her child had been paid £35,000 by an unidentified well known male BBC presenter in exchange for nude photos since 2020, since her child was 17, which could have been an illegal act in the UK.<ref>[https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-66186358 Huw Edwards: How Sun story about BBC presenter developed]. ''BBC News''. 16 July 2023. Retrieved 16 July 2023.</ref> ''The Sun'' alleged that her child had used the money to fund their [[cocaine addiction]]. A spokesperson said the BBC would be "actively attempting to speak to those who have contacted us in order to seek further detail and understanding of the situation".<ref>[https://www.bbc.com/news/entertainment-arts-66140356 BBC presenter accused of paying teen for explicit photos – report]</ref> 

By 9 July, the BBC said that the presenter had been suspended.<ref>{{cite news |title=The BBC suspends presenter over claims he paid a teenager for explicit photos |url=https://apnews.com/article/bbc-presenter-allegations-explicit-photos-52147917963c5006db13693dbdfbade2 |access-date=10 July 2023 |work=AP News |agency=Associated Press |date=9 July 2023}}</ref> On 10 July, the lawyer of the alleged victim told the BBC that nothing inappropriate or illegal had taken place and dismissed the allegations.<ref>{{cite news |last1=Gregory |first1=James |title='Nothing inappropriate' in BBC presenter row – young person's lawyer |url=https://www.bbc.com/news/entertainment-arts-66159357 |access-date=13 July 2023 |work=[[BBC News]] |date=11 July 2023}}</ref> On 11 July, a second person came forward, accusing the presenter of sending "abusive and menacing" messages on a dating app.<ref>{{Cite news |date=11 July 2023 |title=BBC presenter sent abusive and menacing messages to second young person |work=BBC News |url=https://www.bbc.com/news/entertainment-arts-66165766 |access-date=12 July 2023}}</ref> 

On 12 July, the Metropolitan Police said that there was no evidence of a criminal offence. Shortly afterwards, the presenter was named as [[Huw Edwards]] in a statement by his wife, Vicky Flind. She said Edwards had been hospitalised for mental health problems.<ref>{{Cite news |last1=Waterson |first1=Jim |date=12 July 2023 |title=Wife of Huw Edwards names him as BBC presenter at centre of allegations |work=The Guardian |url=https://www.theguardian.com/media/2023/jul/12/wife-of-huw-edwards-names-him-as-bbc-presenter-at-centre-of-allegations |access-date=12 July 2023}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |title=Huw Edwards named as BBC presenter accused of paying teen for explicit pictures |url=https://news.sky.com/story/huw-edwardss-wife-names-him-as-bbc-presenter-accused-of-paying-teen-for-explicit-pictures-report-12917735 |access-date=12 July 2023 |publisher=Sky News }}</ref> ''The Sun''{{'s}} reporting changed to say the contact began when the teenager was 17, without specifying when explicit photos were first exchanged.<ref>{{cite news |last1=MacIntosh |first1=Steven |last2=Youngs |first2=Ian |date=12 July 2023 |title=Questions for the Sun over BBC presenter story |work=[[BBC News]] |url=https://www.bbc.com/news/entertainment-arts-66174059 |access-date=13 July 2023}}</ref>

The BBC's coverage of events was considered excessive by some. Claire Enders, a media analyst, told ''[[The New York Times]]'': "What we had was a [[kangaroo court]], which destroyed someone who did not commit a crime", saying that the BBC "got drawn into a trap set by ''The Sun''".<ref name="Landler">{{cite news |last1=Landler |first1=Mark |title=The BBC Aired Saturation Coverage of Anchor's Behavior. Was It Too Much? |url=https://www.nytimes.com/2023/07/13/world/europe/bbc-huw-edwards-saturation-coverage.html |access-date=20 July 2023 |work=The New York Times |date=13 July 2023}}</ref> [[Alan Rusbridger]], the former editor of ''[[The Guardian]]'', also told the ''NYT'' that "The BBC lost its sense of proportion" in its coverage of the story, adding: "It gets into this mind-set where it feels it must make up for sluggishness in handling issues by showing a clean pair of hands in covering them."<ref name="Landler" />

On 29 July, the Metropolitan Police announced that Edwards had been charged with three counts of creating indecent images of children. The charges involved images allegedly shared in a [[WhatsApp]] chat between December 2020 and April 2022. Edwards was arrested on 8 November 2023 and charged on 26 June 2024, following authorisation from the [[Crown Prosecution Service]]. He has been bailed to appear at [[Westminster Magistrates' Court]] on 31 July 2024.<ref>{{Cite web |last=Youngs |first=Ian |date=2024-07-29 |title=Huw Edwards charged with making indecent images of children |url=https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/crgr49q591go |access-date=2024-07-29 |website=BBC News |language=en-GB}}</ref>

On 16 September 2024, at [[Westminster Magistrates' Court]], Edwards received a six-month [[Suspended sentence|suspended]] jail sentence after pleading guilty to three counts of [[Protection of Children Act 1978#Definitions|making indecent images of children]]. He was also placed on the [[Sex offender registry#United Kingdom|sex offenders' register]] for seven years and ordered to attend a sex offenders treatment programme.<ref>{{cite web | url=https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cgm7dvv128ro | title=Huw Edwards given suspended sentence for child abuse image offences | date=15 September 2024 }}</ref>

===2023: Report about Nigel Farage's bank account===
{{See also|Nigel Farage Coutts bank scandal}}
After accepting that its report about the closure of the [[Coutts]] bank account held by former [[UKIP]] leader, [[Nigel Farage]], was inaccurate, the BBC amended their article, and came under pressure to apologise to Farage.<ref>{{Cite news |last=Singh |first=Anita |date=20 July 2023 |title=BBC under pressure to apologise to Nigel Farage over Coutts account report |work=The Telegraph |url=https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2023/07/20/jon-sopel-apology-nigel-farage-closure-coutts-bank-account/ |access-date=21 July 2023}}</ref><ref name=":5">{{Cite news |last=Rawlinson |first=Kevin |date=21 July 2023 |title=BBC amends story on closure of Farage's Coutts bank account |work=The Guardian |url=https://www.theguardian.com/media/2023/jul/21/bbc-amends-story-on-closure-of-farages-coutts-bank-account |access-date=21 July 2023}}</ref> After Farage had complained that his account had been closed for political reasons, the BBC challenged his version by reporting that it had information saying it had been closed because he was not wealthy enough to hold the account.<ref name=":5" /> Using a request under the data protection laws, Farage obtained a 40-page document from the bank stating that the reason for the closure was 'because of the "reputational risk" he was seen to represent'.<ref>{{Cite news |last=Beal |first=James |date=20 July 2023 |title=Coutts v Nigel Farage: the full dossier and key points |work=[[The Times]] |url=https://www.thetimes.com/world/russia-ukraine-war/article/nigel-farage-accuses-coutts-of-smears-over-xenophobia-zhvgdpscn |access-date=21 July 2023}}</ref> Farage said he was going to make a formal complaint about the BBC's reporting.<ref name=":5" />

On 24 July 2023, ''The Telegraph'' reported that both the BBC, and [[Simon Jack]], the journalist who wrote the article, had apologised to Farage for their mistake.<ref>{{Cite news |last=Bullen |first=Jamie |date=24 July 2023 |title=BBC and Simon Jack apologise to Nigel Farage over Coutts account story |work=The Telegraph |url=https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2023/07/24/nigel-farage-simon-jack-apologises-coutts-account-closure/ |access-date=24 July 2023}}</ref>

=== 2023: BBC Arabic antisemitism ===
In September 2023, [[BBC Arabic]] published an article on [[Suicide attack|suicide attacks]], claiming a link between modern-day [[Jihadism|jihadists]] and the [[Sicarii]] (who did commit mass suicide, but not as part of an attack). The article was strongly criticized by [[Committee for Accuracy in Middle East Reporting and Analysis|CAMERA]], [[Campaign Against Antisemitism]], and [[Alex Carlile, Baron Carlile of Berriew|Lord Carlile]], the government’s former independent reviewer of terrorism legislation.<ref>{{Cite web |last=Pope |first=Felix |date=2023-09-14 |title=BBC under fire after linking 'fanatic Jews' of history to 9/11 terror |url=https://www.thejc.com/news/bbc-under-fire-after-linking-fanatic-jews-of-history-to-9-11-terror-d87ews36 |access-date=2025-06-17 |website=The Jewish Chronicle |language=en}}</ref>

On 5 October 2023, [[BBC News Arabic|BBC Arabic]] published a video claiming that observant Jews spit on Christians to celebrate the holiday Sukkot. The BBC did not issue an apology until June 2025.<ref>{{Cite web |last=Garfinkel |first=Imogen |date=2025-06-12 |title=BBC apologises for article claiming Jews spit on Christians in 'holiday ritual' |url=https://www.thejc.com/news/uk/bbc-apologises-jews-spit-christians-holiday-ritual-xzh0xzjt |access-date=2025-06-17 |website=The Jewish Chronicle |language=en}}</ref>

===2023: Reporting of the Gaza war===
{{See also|Criticism of the BBC#2023 Gaza war}}

In October 2023, the BBC denied accusations that it was acting as a propagandist for terrorist groups by repeatedly reporting unverified speculation that Israel was responsible for the [[Al-Ahli Arab Hospital explosion|explosion at the al-Ahli Arab Hospital]] in Gaza and for refusing to describe Hamas as a terrorist organisation.<ref>{{Cite news |last1=Sherwin |first1=Adam |last2=Merrick |first2=Jane |date=18 October 2023 |title=BBC denies spouting 'Hamas propaganda' over hospital blast as insiders blame 'fast-moving' news |url=https://inews.co.uk/news/media/bbc-insider-fast-moving-situation-israel-hospital-blast-2695574 |work=i}}</ref>

In late 2023, the BBC drew backlash for allegedly using softer wording with Palestinians killed in the [[Gaza war]] compared to Israelis that were killed. The primary example of this was the use of the word "killed" for Israelis and "dead" for Palestinians in their updates on the war, even though the Palestinian death toll had been considerably higher.<ref>{{Cite news |last=İnceoğlu |first=Yasemin |date=1 November 2023 |title='Dead' Versus 'Killed': A Closer Look at the Media Bias in Reporting Israel-Palestine Conflict |work=The Wire India |url=https://thewire.in/media/dead-versus-killed-a-closer-look-at-the-media-bias-in-reporting-israel-palestine-conflict |access-date=9 February 2024}}</ref>

===2024: Portrayal of Milton Keynes on ''EastEnders''===
In an episode of ''[[EastEnders]]'' aired on 4 March 2024, the BBC drew backlash over the portrayal of [[Milton Keynes]] when the character [[Bianca Jackson]] played by [[Patsy Palmer]] returned to screens in scenes set in her home in the city. One viewer, who has lived in the city since the 1970s, said: "They've chosen my city, my home, as a place to depict as being a slum." [[Ben Everitt]], the [[Conservative Party (UK)|Conservative]] MP for [[Milton Keynes North]], said he was unhappy with the portrayal, saying that he would be contacting producers of the programme to suggest writing another storyline about "some of the brilliant parts of Milton Keynes".<ref>{{Cite news |last1=Fullbrook |first1=Danny |last2=Vernon-Smith |first2=Jonathan |date=6 March 2024 |title=MP says depiction of Milton Keynes in EastEnders is 'out of order' |work=[[BBC News]] |url=https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-beds-bucks-herts-68483686 |access-date=6 March 2024}}</ref>

===2024: ''Mrs Brown's Boys'' racist joke controversy===
On 14 October 2024, the ''[[Daily Mirror]]'' published a story stating that [[Brendan O'Carroll]] who stars as Agnes Brown in [[Mrs Brown's Boys]] made a racist remark during a rehearsal of a Christmas special.<ref>{{cite news 
|last=Brynt |first=Tom |date=14 October 2024 |title=Mrs Brown's Boys star Brendan O'Carroll in BBC racism probe - 'clumsy joke backfired' |work=[[Daily Mirror]] |url=https://www.mirror.co.uk/tv/tv-news/mrs-browns-boys-star-brendan-33889454?int_source=nba |access-date=16 October 2024}}</ref>{{better source needed|reason=tabloid|date=September 2025}}

===2025: ''Gaza: How to Survive a Warzone''===
In February 2025, BBC Two aired a documentary titled ''[[Gaza: How to Survive a Warzone]]'' as part of its ''[[This World (TV series)|This World]]'' series.<ref>{{cite web |title=BBC Two announces new documentary by award-winning filmmakers Jamie Roberts and Yousef Hammash |url=https://www.bbc.co.uk/mediacentre/2025/jamie-roberts-yousef-hammash-bbc-two-documentary |website=BBC Media Centre |publisher=BBC |access-date=21 February 2025 |language=en |date=20 February 2025}}</ref> The film is narrated by a 13-year-old boy who is the son of [[Hamas]]'s deputy minister of agriculture. BBC stated that the film's production company had not informed the broadcaster of the boy's family relations. BBC added an informational notice to the film description on its [[BBC iPlayer|iPlayer]] before pulling the film the next day.<ref>{{Cite news |first=Ian |last=Youngs |url=https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c9wpk5re5e1o |title=BBC faces questions over using son of Hamas official in Gaza: How To Survive A War Zone |date=20 February 2025 |website=BBC News |agency=BBC |accessdate=20 February 2025}}</ref><ref>{{Cite news |first=Ian |last=Youngs |url=https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/clydv5yngq4o |title=BBC pulls Gaza film as it carries out checks over Hamas links |date=21 February 2025 |website=BBC News |agency=BBC |accessdate=21 February 2025}}</ref> Culture Secretary [[Lisa Nandy]] said she would raise concerns with BBC bosses over the documentary. Hamas is a proscribed terrorist group in the UK, Israel and other countries.<ref>{{Cite web|first=Ian|last=Youngs|url=https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c9wpk5re5e1o|title=BBC faces questions over using son of Hamas official in Gaza: How To Survive A War Zone|date=20 February 2025|website=BBC News|publisher=BBC|access-date=20 February 2025}}</ref> The film was subsequently removed from [[BBC iPlayer]].<ref>{{Cite web |first=Ian |last=Youngs |url=https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/clydv5yngq4o |title=BBC pulls Gaza film as it carries out checks over Hamas links |date=21 February 2025 |website=BBC News |publisher=BBC |accessdate=21 February 2025}}</ref>

In October 2025, an investigation by the UK's media regulator, [[Ofcom]], found that the documentary was "materially misleading" and a "serious breach" of broadcasting rules as it failed to disclose that the 13-year-old narrator was the son of an official of [[Hamas]], a [[Terrorism Act 2000#Proscribed groups|proscribed]] terrorist organisation in the UK. While the BBC had already removed the documentary from its [[BBC iPlayer]], Ofcom instructed the BBC to broadcast an apology, marking the first time since 2009 that the BBC had been sanctioned by Ofcom and ordered to make an on-air apology. A BBC spokesperson confirmed that BBC fully accepted Ofcom's ruling and would comply with the sanction.<ref>{{cite news |last1=Minelle |first1=Bethany |title=BBC Gaza documentary breached broadcasting code, Ofcom finds |url=https://news.sky.com/story/bbc-gaza-documentary-breached-broadcasting-code-ofcom-finds-13451472 |access-date=29 October 2025 |work=Sky News |date=17 October 2025 |language=en}}</ref><ref>{{cite news |last1=Youngs |first1=Ian |title=BBC Gaza documentary a 'serious' breach of rules, Ofcom says |url=https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c629j5m2n01o |access-date=29 October 2025 |work=BBC |date=17 October 2025}}</ref>

===2025: ''Masterchef'' controversy===
In November 2024, it was reported that [[Gregg Wallace]] was to step away from ''[[Masterchef]]'' while allegations of historical misconduct were investigated.<ref>[https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cd7n1e8n721o Gregg Wallace to step away from presenting MasterChef], ''BBC News'', 28 November 2024</ref> This came after the BBC reported to Wallace's representatives that there were allegations of inappropriate sexual comments from 13 individuals.<ref>{{cite news |date=2024-11-28 |title=Kirsty Wark: Gregg Wallace used sexualised language |url=https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/videos/cx27r57d4pxo |access-date=2024-11-28 |work=BBC News |language=en-GB}}</ref> In July 2025, production company [[Banijay UK Productions|Banijay]] reported that an inquiry into the allegations (conducted by law firm [[Lewis Silkin LLP|Lewis Silkin]]) found that 45 of 83 claims against Wallace, as well as an allegation of co-host [[John Torode]] using an "an extremely offensive racist term", were upheld.<ref>{{Cite web |date=2025-07-15 |title=John Torode sacked as MasterChef presenter after racist language claim upheld |url=https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c8j1vzngdjpo |access-date=2025-07-15 |website=BBC News |language=en-GB}}</ref> Both presenters will not have their contracts renewed.

===2025: Glastonbury Festival===
At the [[Glastonbury Festival 2025]], punk-rap duo [[Bob Vylan]] sparked controversy when they led the crowd in chants of "Free, free Palestine" and "death, death to the [[IDF]]", referring to the Israeli Defence Forces, during a live performance broadcast by the BBC.<ref>{{cite magazine|url=https://ew.com/bbc-condemns-antisemitic-sentiments-from-bob-vylan-at-glastonbury-11763511|title=BBC regrets streaming Bob Vylan's 'death to IDF' chants at Glastonbury Festival, condemns 'antisemitic sentiments'|magazine=Entertainment Weekly|first=Shania|last=Russell|date=30 June 2025|access-date=9 November 2025}}</ref> Despite internal warnings labeling the act as "high risk", the BBC aired the set without delay or intervention, later admitting to "errors … both in the lead-up to and during Bob Vylan's appearance".<ref>{{cite news|url=https://www.itv.com/news/2025-07-03/bbc-to-stop-broadcasting-high-risk-performances-live-after-bob-vylan-row|title=BBC to stop broadcasting 'high risk' performances live after Bob Vylan Glastonbury controversy|work=ITV|date=3 July 2025|access-date=9 November 2025}}</ref> The broadcast was widely condemned by political leaders, including UK Culture Secretary [[Lisa Nandy]], who accused the BBC of airing antisemitic and inflammatory content.<ref name="Sky-Glastonbury">{{cite news|url=https://news.sky.com/story/culture-secretary-lisa-nandy-hits-out-at-bbc-over-glastonbury-controversy-13389603|title=Culture secretary Lisa Nandy hits out at BBC over Glastonbury controversy|work=Sky News|date=1 July 2025|access-date=9 November 2025}}</ref> The BBC's Executive Complaints Unit later upheld complaints, concluding that the segment breached the corporation's harm and offence guidelines by containing antisemitic language.<ref>{{cite news|url=https://news.sky.com/story/bob-vylan-bbc-partly-upholds-complaints-over-glastonbury-set-13438423|title=Bob Vylan: BBC partly upholds complaints over Glastonbury set|work=Sky News|date=26 September 2025|access-date=9 November 2025}}</ref>

In response, the BBC announced that it would no longer livestream or broadcast "high-risk" performances without added safeguards, marking a major policy shift for its music coverage.<ref>{{cite news|url=https://news.sky.com/story/bbc-to-stop-broadcasting-high-risk-performances-live-after-bob-vylan-glastonbury-row-13391872|title=BBC to stop broadcasting 'high risk' performances live after Bob Vylan Glastonbury row|work=Sky News|date=3 July 2025|access-date=9 November 2025}}</ref> BBC Director-General [[Tim Davie]] publicly called the decision to air the set "a very significant mistake", while the corporation's Director of Music, Lorna Clarke, stepped down from her daily responsibilities following internal criticism.<ref>{{cite news|url=https://www.standard.co.uk/news/uk/bbc-tim-davie-gaza-mps-thomas-skinner-b1246755.html|title=Tim Davie calls BBC's Bob Vylan Glastonbury broadcast 'significant mistake'|work=The Standard|first=Laura|last=Harding|date=9 September 2025|access-date=9 November 2025}}</ref><ref>{{cite news|url=https://www.euronews.com/culture/2025/07/07/bbc-director-of-music-steps-down-after-bob-vylan-glastonbury-controversy|title=BBC director of music steps down after Bob Vylan Glastonbury controversy|work=Euronews|first=David|last=Mouriquand|date=7 July 2025|access-date=9 November 2025}}</ref> Glastonbury organisers condemned the "death to the IDF" chants, stating that hate speech had no place at the festival, while UK police launched a criminal investigation into the performance.<ref name="Sky-Glastonbury"/><ref>{{cite news|url=https://apnews.com/article/uk-glastonbury-bob-vylan-bbc-israel-5f1c607d498c676378ff1540bda0ec23|title=UK police probe Bob Vylan's festival chants against Israeli military, as US revokes band's visas|work=AP News|first=Sylvia|last=Hui|date=30 June 2025|access-date=9 November 2025}}</ref> The controversy ignited wider debate about artistic freedom, editorial responsibility, and the risks of unfiltered live broadcasting at large public events.<ref>{{cite news|url=https://www.theguardian.com/media/2025/jul/03/bbc-to-drop-high-risk-live-performances-after-bob-vylan-glastonbury-set|title=BBC to drop 'high risk' live performances after Bob Vylan Glastonbury set|work=The Guardian|first=Michael|last=Savage|date=3 July 2025|access-date=9 November 2025}}</ref>

===2025: Unsolicited nude images incident===
In August 2025, there were reports that a female presenter ranked among the BBC's highest paid employees had shown an image of a man's genitals to a junior female member of staff who was left "horrified" and tearful.<ref name="Deadline-Aug25">{{cite news|url=https://deadline.com/2025/08/bbc-female-presenter-explicit-picture-1236480181/|title=Female BBC Presenter Allegedly Showed Unwanted Explicit Image To Colleague|work=Deadline|first=Jake|last=Kanter|date=7 August 2025|access-date=8 August 2025}}</ref> The incident occurred during a discussion between female employees about unsolicited nude images and the presenter in question was ordered to apologise for her conduct, though her identity was not officially disclosed.<ref name="Deadline-Aug25"/>

===2025: Coverage of Trump's January 6 Capitol speech ===
{{further|2025 BBC editorial bias allegations}}
In November 2025, ''[[The Daily Telegraph|The Telegraph]]'' reported that an internal BBC memo alleged the broadcaster's ''Panorama'' documentary ''Trump: A Second Chance?'' had misled viewers by editing together two separate portions of a speech by US President [[Donald Trump]] to make it appear he was explicitly encouraging the [[January 6 United States Capitol attack|storming of the US Capitol on 6 January 2021]].<ref name="Telegraph-Capitol">{{cite news|url=https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2025/11/03/bbc-report-reveals-bias-donald-trump/|title=Exclusive: BBC 'doctored' Trump speech, internal report reveals|work=The Telegraph|first=Gordon|last=Rayner|date=3 November 2025|access-date=4 November 2025}}</ref> According to the memo, the programme spliced together remarks made more than 50 minutes apart—one in which Trump said, "We're going to walk down to the Capitol," and another where he declared, "We fight like hell"—thereby creating a false impression of a single continuous exhortation to violence.<ref name="Telegraph-Capitol"/> ''The Telegraph'' further said the documentary then showed footage of supporters marching on the Capitol as if it followed Trump's words, when in fact it had been filmed before his speech began.<ref name="Telegraph-Capitol"/> Conservative Party leader [[Kemi Badenoch]] condemned the alleged edits as "absolutely shocking", telling that "heads should roll" at the BBC and calling for Director-General Tim Davie to "sack whoever put out misinformation".<ref name="BBC-Capitol">{{cite news|url=https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/ckgzkyk7knzo|title=Badenoch calls for sackings at BBC over edited Trump speech|work=BBC News|first=Steven|last=McIntosh|date=4 November 2025|access-date=4 November 2025}}</ref> Former Prime Minister [[Boris Johnson]] also demanded accountability, asking on [[Twitter|X]] whether anyone at the BBC would "take responsibility—and resign".<ref name="BBC-Capitol"/> The memo, reportedly written by former BBC Editorial Guidelines and Standards Committee adviser Michael Prescott, accused ''Panorama'' of creating a "distortion of the day's events" that undermined public trust, though BBC News stated it had not seen the document.<ref>{{cite news|url=https://www.theguardian.com/media/2025/nov/03/bbc-accused-selectively-editing-trump-clip-capitol-attack|title=BBC accused of selectively editing Trump clip from day of Capitol attack|work=The Guardian|first=Michael|last=Savage|date=3 November 2025|access-date=4 November 2025}}</ref> A BBC spokesperson said that while the corporation did not comment on leaked materials, it took all feedback seriously and considered it carefully.<ref name="BBC-Capitol"/> The issue drew attention from MPs and the Department for Culture, Media and Sport, with Culture Secretary [[Lisa Nandy]] reportedly reviewing the memo and the BBC assuring officials that the matter was being examined internally.<ref name="BBC-Capitol"/>

In the wake of mounting criticism, [[Tim Davie]] announced his resignation as BBC Director-General on 9 November 2025, stating the decision was his own but acknowledging mounting scrutiny over the broadcaster's editorial practices.<ref>{{cite news|url=https://www.theguardian.com/media/2025/nov/09/tim-davie-expected-to-resign-bbc-director-general|title=Tim Davie resigns as BBC director general after accusations of 'serious and systemic' bias in coverage|work=The Guardian|first=Michael|last=Savage|date=9 November 2025|access-date=9 November 2025}}</ref> His departure came alongside the resignation of [[Deborah Turness]], the CEO of BBC News.<ref>{{cite news|url=https://apnews.com/article/bbc-director-resigns-trump-speech-editing-3aab83138d58c92db1bb00e77e568876|title=BBC director resigns after criticism of the broadcaster's editing of a Trump speech|work=AP News|first=Jill|last=Lawless|date=9 November 2025|access-date=9 November 2025}}</ref> BBC chairman [[Samir Shah]] apologised to the UK Parliament's Culture, Media and Sport Committee, acknowledging in his letter to them that the ''Panorama'' edit of Trump's speech was an "error of judgement" that wrongly gave the impression of a direct call for violence.<ref>{{cite news|url=https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c4gw001kw97o|title=BBC chairman apologises over Trump speech edit|work=BBC News|first=Maia|last=Davies|date=10 November 2025|access-date=10 November 2025}}</ref>

Defenders of the BBC, while acknowledging the inappropriate editing of a Trump speech in a 2024 ''Panorama'' programme, spoke of a political "coup".<ref>{{Cite news |last=Savage |first=Michael |date=2025-11-10 |title='Make no mistake – this was a coup': the extraordinary downfall of the BBC's top bosses |url=https://www.theguardian.com/media/ng-interactive/2025/nov/10/make-no-mistake-this-was-a-coup-the-extraordinary-downfall-of-the-bbcs-top-bosses |access-date=2025-11-11 |work=The Guardian |language=en-GB |issn=0261-3077}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |date=2025-11-10 |title=BBC faces 'existential' threat after exit of top executives |url=https://www.ft.com/content/28b40d2f-f4e0-4976-87ca-584a0938076c |access-date=2025-11-11 |website=www.ft.com}}</ref> They highlighted the alleged role of BBC board member [[Robbie Gibb]], who had worked as an editorial advisor to the right-wing [[GB News]] channel before being appointed to the BBC board by [[Boris Johnson]]. In the course of the controversy, [[Lib Dem]] leader [[Ed Davey]] and [[First Minister of Scotland|Scotland's First Minister]] [[John Swinney]] called for Gibb's removal from the BBC board.<ref name=":32">{{Cite web |date=2025-11-11 |title=Ed Davey calls for Robbie Gibb to be ousted from BBC board |url=https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/bbc-robbie-gibb-ed-davey-tim-davie-b2862736.html |access-date=2025-11-11 |website=The Independent |language=en}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |date=2025-11-11 |title=BBC 'coup' row over Tory-linked board member Robbie Gibb deepens |url=https://www.thenational.scot/news/25612782.bbc-coup-row-deepens-tory-linked-board-member-robbie-gibb/ |access-date=2025-11-11 |website=The National |language=en}}</ref>

On 13 November, ''The Telegraph'' reported that the BBC's current-affairs programme ''[[Newsnight]]'' had, in June 2022, also aired a version of Trump's 6 January 2021 speech in which separate remarks were presented as a single continuous exhortation.<ref>{{cite news|url=https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2025/11/13/bbc-doctored-trump-speech-second-time-newsnight/|title=BBC Newsnight also doctored Trump speech|work=The Telegraph|first1=Camilla|last1=Tominey|first2=Tim|last2=Stanley|first3=John|last3=Cadigan|first4=Rob|last4=Crilly|date=13 November 2025|access-date=13 November 2025}}</ref> On the same day, the BBC issued an apology to Trump over the editing of his speech in ''Panorama'' but rejected his demands for compensation.<ref>{{cite news|url=https://www.theguardian.com/media/2025/nov/13/bbc-apologises-to-donald-trump-over-edit-of-speech-for-panorama|title=BBC apologises to Donald Trump over edit of speech for Panorama|work=The Guardian|first1=Tara|last1=Conlan|first2=Michael|last2=Savage|date=13 November 2025|access-date=13 November 2025}}</ref>

==See also==
{{Portal|Radio|Television|United Kingdom}}
* [[Criticism of the BBC]]

'''Other channels:'''
* [[Al Jazeera controversies and criticism]]
* [[CBS News controversies and criticism]]
* [[CNN controversies]]
* [[Fox News controversies]]
* [[MSNBC controversies]]
* [[The New York Times controversies]]

==Notes==
{{reflist|group=lower-alpha}}

==References==
{{reflist}}

===Cited works===
{{refbegin|30em}}
* {{cite book | last=Moore | first=Charles | title=Margaret Thatcher: The Authorized Biography | volume=2 | publisher=Allen Lane | publication-place=London | date=2015 | isbn=978-0-7139-9288-5}}
* {{cite journal | journal=Intercultural Communication and Diplomacy | publisher=DiploFoundation |year=2004 | editor-first=Hannah | editor-last=Slavik | title=A Clash of Professional Cultures: The David Kelly Affair | first=Biljana | last=Scott | url=https://ling.sprachwiss.uni-konstanz.de/pages/home/butt/main/material/scott-clash.pdf | access-date=30 March 2024}}
{{refend}}

==External links==
* [https://web.archive.org/web/20061117040131/http://www.bbc.co.uk/heritage/in_depth/pressure/index.shtml The BBC Under Pressure] – A history of controversial incidents through BBC News history.

{{BBC}}

{{DEFAULTSORT:BBC controversies}}
[[Category:BBC controversies| ]]
[[Category:Censorship of broadcasting in the United Kingdom]]
[[Category:Journalism controversies by outlet]]
[[Category:Lists of controversies]]
[[Category:Political controversies in television]]
[[Category:Television controversies in the United Kingdom]]