In a Fox interview, Donald Trump reiterated his “obligation” to sue the BBC for “defrauding the public”, following the broadcaster’s deliberate manipulation of his January 6 speech. He’s threatening $1 billion in damages and has sent a legal letter demanding that the “false, defamatory, disparaging, and inflammatory statements” be retracted immediately. If the BBC “does not comply” by Friday, Trump will be “left with no alternative but to enforce his legal and equitable rights, all of which are expressly reserved and are not waived, including by filing legal action for no less than 1,000,000,000 dollars in damages”.
A Public Broadcaster “Defrauds a Country”
As covered in our recent article, this controversy centres a BBC Panorama documentary that took Trump’s January 6 speech – which was followed by the storming of the Capitol – and spliced together pieces said an hour apart to make it sound more incendiary than it really was. Trump’s “peaceful and patriotic” language was removed to heighten a sense of deliberate escalation by the President, and imply that the resulting violence was a direct consequence of his words.
Trump just doubled down on the original threats in a public interview, calling the edit “dishonest” and saying the program “butchered” his remarks. “They defrauded the public, and they admitted it” he continued.
Whether in UK broadcast law, or US defamation law, the potential lawsuit will examine the same thing: would a reasonable viewer be misled into believing an alternate narrative based on the BBC’s edits? If the way it was presented changed the meaning, then it’s not simple trimming for time, but rather a total transformation of political facts.
BBC Must Be Held Accountable
Trump says suing isn’t optional but an “obligation”, arguing that a global broadcaster cannot be allowed to rewrite a head-of-state speech without consequence.
As we discussed in the previous article, the BBC is not just a fringe news outlet. It’s paid for by the taxpayer – regardless of their political affiliation – and must therefore remain neutral. When pivotal political events can have their meaning not just altered but totally inverted, there is a critical lapse in impartiality at the cost of the public. Panorama “regretting the confusion” doesn’t cut it.
The BBC reaches almost every country in the world. Its reporting is trusted by hundreds of millions of people and is the only way many experience world events. Manipulating key global news simply to fit its own political agenda also changes how people everywhere form their views of the world.
It’s Not a One-Off
From the Bashir and Diana scandal to Newsnight impartiality rows, the BBC’s worst crises have all shared a common thread: deliberate decisions about editing and framing high-stakes events to tilt their audience’s understanding has long since altered public opinion. The Panorama cut may be the highest-profile case so far, given that even the President of the USA has been targeted. It changes how people remember and discuss pivotal moments in history. Many believe Trump directly incited violence on January 6 because of fact manipulation like this. And the President – along with much of the tax-paying public – is rightly demanding accountability.
Final Thought
The BBC should serve the public. But if they don’t respond by Friday, a $1,000,000,000 lawsuit will be filed against them by one of the most powerful men in the world. This is not the first time the BBC crossed an impartiality line, but it could well become the most expensive.
Join the Conversation
Do you agree that Trump is “obliged” to sue the BBC? Is it time they were held truly, publicly accountable for its impartial, narrative-bending reporting? This, for some, could be the first time they’ve heard about the BBC acting in such a way – maybe it’s time their tactics were laid bare. Add your thoughts below.
The Expose Urgently Needs Your Help…
Can you please help to keep the lights on with The Expose’s honest, reliable, powerful and truthful journalism?
Your Government & Big Tech organisations
try to silence & shut down The Expose.
So we need your help to ensure
we can continue to bring you the
facts the mainstream refuses to.
The government does not fund us
to publish lies and propaganda on their
behalf like the Mainstream Media.
Instead, we rely solely on your support. So
please support us in our efforts to bring
you honest, reliable, investigative journalism
today. It’s secure, quick and easy.
Please choose your preferred method below to show your support.
Categories: Uncategorised
Good. Everyone who said ‘safe and effective’ should be sued. Unless they reveal who told them so, or forced them to say it. Let’s find the real evil culprits.
Are you looking for an easy and effective way to make money online? Do not search anymore ! e Our platform offers you a complete selection of paid surveys from the best market research companies.
.
Here Come ……………… Goto.now/QCMrY
‘Trouble is, they don’t give a damn about the £1 Billion. The licence fees will pay or the tax payer, so what do they care. UK governments are to blame for using the BBC as their propaganda outlet. How do you fine a government without fining its people? They’ll just invent another black hole.
Hi Ken,
But as the participation in paying the TV licence fee is rightly dwindling, there’s an admittedly unlikely but possible chance that this finally piles some pressure on the BBC to correct its course. I won’t hold my breath, though.
Regards,
G Calder
Hopefully Trump’s action will persuade more in UK to stop watching TV.
But if fewer viewing is labelled increased evasion, or fee increased due to fewer viewers, those still watching will want proposed new general tax or fee added to income or council tax.
No TV forced to pay TV is ‘shrinkflation’ policy of ‘nanny’ et al, like escalated standing charges forcing us to pay during power-cut or water stoppage.